Digital BW, The Print

There are some new results on in the Aardenburg Imaging fade tests relating to the materials we use.  
See http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/

To see the latest full results you should pony up the fees so that we can keep this resource going.

Among other results, the 20 MLux Hours results for the 1800 Eboni 3-MK are there.  Also in the set of test results are Epson ABW, HP, PiezoTone Selenium and Sepia, as well as K6 neutral.

I must confess I was a little disappointed.  The H. Photo Rag tone shift stopped the 3MK from getting an I* rating of 100 for every patch (no other inkset did either).  However, if the paper white and the next lightest patch are excluded, all the rest got the top rating.  Surprisingly, not all the PhotoRag showed this same tone shift.  Samples of the paper clearly vary (or others were smart enough to lay their paper in the sun for a while before printing it).

If we look just at the 50% patch, so that we have a fair comparison that would include the HP Z3100 inkset and a PiezoTone selenium (where Portfolio K was used -- not a fair comparison to full pigment), the results are consistent with my view that 100% carbon is a very valid approach.  The Cone carbon Sepia and Eboni 3MK had the lowest delta E's of the group.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Thanks, Paul,

I'm thinking very seriously of joining. As I think I've posted here before, I'm doing some work for architects who are submitting buildings to the National Register of Historic Places and these issues are of course highly important to us.

I'm now using an Epson R1800 with your 3MK with MIS Eboni carbon ink approach and am very pleased with the results, as are my clients. I'm standardizing for now on PremierArt Fine Art Matte 205 (same as Epson PremierArt Scrapbook, right?). I didn't see this particular printer/ink/paper combination listed although I'm convinced it meets archival standards. In an e-mail correspondence with the Register they gave me the nod to submit prints using this combination. However, it would be also helpful to have that specific combination tested at Aardenburg, so I may join with a view toward submitting that to them. Perhaps you've already done so and it's "in their hopper". Oh, and I also spray afterward with Premier Art's Print Shield.

I couldn't find that specific combination listed on Wilhelm's site either but it was a little hard to navigate that site so I may have missed it. How do these two testing agencies compare? Are they mostly in agreement, do  you think?

And speaking of Wilhelm, PremierArt's website state that they have submitted that paper to him and they are awaiting his results.

Thanks for your continued good work for all of us!

Paul W.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:

>
> There are some new results on in the Aardenburg Imaging fade tests relating to the materials we use.  
> See http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/
> 
> To see the latest full results you should pony up the fees so that we can keep this resource going.
> 
> Among other results, the 20 MLux Hours results for the 1800 Eboni 3-MK are there.  Also in the set of test results are Epson ABW, HP, PiezoTone Selenium and Sepia, as well as K6 neutral.
> 
> I must confess I was a little disappointed.  The H. Photo Rag tone shift stopped the 3MK from getting an I* rating of 100 for every patch (no other inkset did either).  However, if the paper white and the next lightest patch are excluded, all the rest got the top rating.  Surprisingly, not all the PhotoRag showed this same tone shift.  Samples of the paper clearly vary (or others were smart enough to lay their paper in the sun for a while before printing it).
> 
> If we look just at the 50% patch, so that we have a fair comparison that would include the HP Z3100 inkset and a PiezoTone selenium (where Portfolio K was used -- not a fair comparison to full pigment), the results are consistent with my view that 100% carbon is a very valid approach.  The Cone carbon Sepia and Eboni 3MK had the lowest delta E's of the group.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

I'm a paid up Aardenburg member and am looking at the Light Fade Tests results page but don't see the R1800 with Eboni 3MK listed.

I don't see cause for disappointment, Paul, it sounds like the inks are performing as expected.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, Paul,
> 
> I'm thinking very seriously of joining. As I think I've posted here before, I'm doing some work for architects who are submitting buildings to the National Register of Historic Places and these issues are of course highly important to us.
> 
> I'm now using an Epson R1800 with your 3MK with MIS Eboni carbon ink approach and am very pleased with the results, as are my clients. I'm standardizing for now on PremierArt Fine Art Matte 205 (same as Epson PremierArt Scrapbook, right?). I didn't see this particular printer/ink/paper combination listed although I'm convinced it meets archival standards. In an e-mail correspondence with the Register they gave me the nod to submit prints using this combination. However, it would be also helpful to have that specific combination tested at Aardenburg, so I may join with a view toward submitting that to them. Perhaps you've already done so and it's "in their hopper". Oh, and I also spray afterward with Premier Art's Print Shield.
> 
> I couldn't find that specific combination listed on Wilhelm's site either but it was a little hard to navigate that site so I may have missed it. How do these two testing agencies compare? Are they mostly in agreement, do  you think?
> 
> And speaking of Wilhelm, PremierArt's website state that they have submitted that paper to him and they are awaiting his results.
> 
> Thanks for your continued good work for all of us!
> 
> Paul W.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@> wrote:
> >
> > There are some new results on in the Aardenburg Imaging fade tests relating to the materials we use.  
> > See http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/
> > 
> > To see the latest full results you should pony up the fees so that we can keep this resource going.
> > 
> > Among other results, the 20 MLux Hours results for the 1800 Eboni 3-MK are there.  Also in the set of test results are Epson ABW, HP, PiezoTone Selenium and Sepia, as well as K6 neutral.
> > 
> > I must confess I was a little disappointed.  The H. Photo Rag tone shift stopped the 3MK from getting an I* rating of 100 for every patch (no other inkset did either).  However, if the paper white and the next lightest patch are excluded, all the rest got the top rating.  Surprisingly, not all the PhotoRag showed this same tone shift.  Samples of the paper clearly vary (or others were smart enough to lay their paper in the sun for a while before printing it).
> > 
> > If we look just at the 50% patch, so that we have a fair comparison that would include the HP Z3100 inkset and a PiezoTone selenium (where Portfolio K was used -- not a fair comparison to full pigment), the results are consistent with my view that 100% carbon is a very valid approach.  The Cone carbon Sepia and Eboni 3MK had the lowest delta E's of the group.
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:
>
> ...
> I couldn't find that specific combination listed on Wilhelm's site either but it was a little hard to navigate that site so I may have missed it. How do these two testing agencies compare? Are they mostly in agreement, do  you think?

Paul, Mark at Aardenburg develop methods Wilhelm has endorsed, in fact they worked together. A close look at the methods of both (a mind numbing endevour) would conclude Mark's testing more informative.
Wilhelm will have great difficulty altering his methods for even great reasons, and keep the legacy tests relevant to the new tests, and keep his manufacturer clients on board (I don't mean he sells out, I mean there are some politics involved, and a business model). There are also historical (therefore of questionable relevance any more) international standards Wilhelm tries to dovetail with. Aardenberg does not have that burden.
We will also only get OEM package combinations tested at Wilhelm, and Mark will test anything sensible, any combination of materials.
It's very important we try to spread support for his efforts. Al our materials are rapidly evolving, and no one but Aadenburg has really adequately jumped on the problem.
Didn't mean to step on your question to Paul, but had some thoughts.. I hope he jumps in.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roger" <rsmith02@...> wrote:
>
> I'm a paid up Aardenburg member and am looking at the Light Fade Tests results page but don't see the R1800 with Eboni 3MK listed.
> 
> I don't see cause for disappointment, Paul, it sounds like the inks are performing as expected.


Hi Roger, 

i sent Paul an advance copy of the Eboni 3MK test results a few days ago since he's was so instrumental in developing this process. I was so overdue in getting the 10 megalux exposure data up on the site, that I just decided to hold off until the 20 meglux hour data had been measured as well. That task is finished now and the only remaining issue is sitting down and updating the website. For practical reasons that have to do with my list management on my website, I've been slowly updating the list in order, and I still have a few brand new samples that need some final edits on their description pages before I post. So, it is those reports and not the Eboni 3MK results  that are holding up the show at the moment. 

I will try to get these final few reports uploaded to the site by tomorrow evening USA EST.
All the monochrome samples  I currently have in test only got started a few months back, so there's not really enough exposure dose on them yet to make definitive statements about the behaviors, but in general I would say that Paul's "full carbon" approach is bearing out so far with theory in terms of best-in-class performance. The reality is that not all monochrome sets are truly "fully carbonized" and dilutes also introduce additional variables, so as the saying goes "mileage may vary". 

cheers,

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Mark,

Will your Eboni 3MK tests include several kinds of paper? As I noted above, I'm using PremierArt Fine Art Paper Matt. They describe it as a rag paper with a 100% cotton base, "naturally acid and lignin free and buffered for added stability", and using no OBA's.

I will definitely send in my membership Monday morning, I want to support this valuable work you are doing. And I appreciate your presence here, in this forum.

Paul W.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roger" <rsmith02@> wrote:
> >
> > I'm a paid up Aardenburg member and am looking at the Light Fade Tests results page but don't see the R1800 with Eboni 3MK listed.
> > 
> > I don't see cause for disappointment, Paul, it sounds like the inks are performing as expected.
> 
> 
> Hi Roger, 
> 
> i sent Paul an advance copy of the Eboni 3MK test results a few days ago since he's was so instrumental in developing this process. I was so overdue in getting the 10 megalux exposure data up on the site, that I just decided to hold off until the 20 meglux hour data had been measured as well. That task is finished now and the only remaining issue is sitting down and updating the website. For practical reasons that have to do with my list management on my website, I've been slowly updating the list in order, and I still have a few brand new samples that need some final edits on their description pages before I post. So, it is those reports and not the Eboni 3MK results  that are holding up the show at the moment. 
> 
> I will try to get these final few reports uploaded to the site by tomorrow evening USA EST.
> All the monochrome samples  I currently have in test only got started a few months back, so there's not really enough exposure dose on them yet to make definitive statements about the behaviors, but in general I would say that Paul's "full carbon" approach is bearing out so far with theory in terms of best-in-class performance. The reality is that not all monochrome sets are truly "fully carbonized" and dilutes also introduce additional variables, so as the saying goes "mileage may vary". 
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Mark
> http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@...> wrote:

> Didn't mean to step on your question to Paul, but had some thoughts.. I hope he jumps in.
> Tyler
>

Oh boy, Tyler, you issued an invitation of sorts? Here's my story in a nutshell. I have been doing image permanence research for over 20 years. I love doing this kind of research because I love the history, science, and art of photography. I'm recognized in the museums and archives community as one of the "experts" in the field though I don't much like the term because I will never run out of new things to learn. My expertise in print permanence testing came through the conservation science and museum & archives community, only partly from my involvement directly with the imaging industry. I'm also an avid amateur photographer and printmaker for over 40 years. And yes, I know Henry Wilhelm very well.  I count him as a good friend, and we have collaborated on many research projects over the years including the development of the I* metric.  

All that said, I concluded in 2005 that in the long run, the only way to test the many interesting inkjet combinations that we as printmakers want to try, is to take control of the testing process ourselves.  Remove the manufacturers' direct underwriting of the testing and just do it ourselves.  I have establishied AaI&A to this purpose and also to conduct new real-world studies of modern digital prints as well. I have also adopted the latest and best test methods since I have no legacy issues, political or otherwise to contend with. Companies and institutions are also welcome to participate by sponsoring group memberships rather than actual tests, but they can't control what the total membership elects to test, so the testing will always remain truly independent.  

Essentially, the AaI&A business model relies on end-users to fund the research. It's a "consumer reports" type of model rather than a "laboratory testing services" type of business model. I've seeded the AaI&A program with my knowledge, labor, and personal capital for over three years now, but very soon some solid end-user support is going to have to kick in or I will have to finally conclude that printmakers, for whatever reasons, really aren't that interested in image permanence testing anymore.  Perhaps the vast majority don't care or perhaps they simply feel that the issues have already been resolved to their satisfaction, or perhaps they feel it's still the vendor's responsibility to provide this information for free (well, you can see the limitations on how that works already). However, careful examination of the AaI&A light fade test results to date reveals that there is still much to understand about these new technologies, hence I press on.

So, there you have it. This group in particular has good reason to support testing of unique product combinations.  At the present time less than 1/10th of 1 percent of you are members, and if I can't ultimately win this group's support at much higher levels than that, then it's pretty unlikely that others would feel any more strongly about my research.

kind regards,

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Mark, I posted a message a few minutes ago saying I would sign up Monday. Well, I just did it via PayPal, didn't need to wait till then!

I want to underline how valuable I think your work is. As I said above I had contacted the National Register of Historic Places and they accepted my Eboni 3MK on PremierArt paper as meeting their standards. As far back as the 70's I was doing photos for Register applications and these were darkroom black and white prints on fiber paper, carefully washed and fixed. Previously this was the only kind of print they would accept.

I never thought I'd hear myself saying this but I now believe these Eboni carbon prints are more archival than the darkroom prints. Your work will strengthen my case as I work with architects and preservation groups. Thanks for your good work!

Paul

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@> wrote:
> 
> > Didn't mean to step on your question to Paul, but had some thoughts.. I hope he jumps in.
> > Tyler
> >
> 
> Oh boy, Tyler, you issued an invitation of sorts? Here's my story in a nutshell. I have been doing image permanence research for over 20 years. I love doing this kind of research because I love the history, science, and art of photography. I'm recognized in the museums and archives community as one of the "experts" in the field though I don't much like the term because I will never run out of new things to learn. My expertise in print permanence testing came through the conservation science and museum & archives community, only partly from my involvement directly with the imaging industry. I'm also an avid amateur photographer and printmaker for over 40 years. And yes, I know Henry Wilhelm very well.  I count him as a good friend, and we have collaborated on many research projects over the years including the development of the I* metric.  
> 
> All that said, I concluded in 2005 that in the long run, the only way to test the many interesting inkjet combinations that we as printmakers want to try, is to take control of the testing process ourselves.  Remove the manufacturers' direct underwriting of the testing and just do it ourselves.  I have establishied AaI&A to this purpose and also to conduct new real-world studies of modern digital prints as well. I have also adopted the latest and best test methods since I have no legacy issues, political or otherwise to contend with. Companies and institutions are also welcome to participate by sponsoring group memberships rather than actual tests, but they can't control what the total membership elects to test, so the testing will always remain truly independent.  
> 
> Essentially, the AaI&A business model relies on end-users to fund the research. It's a "consumer reports" type of model rather than a "laboratory testing services" type of business model. I've seeded the AaI&A program with my knowledge, labor, and personal capital for over three years now, but very soon some solid end-user support is going to have to kick in or I will have to finally conclude that printmakers, for whatever reasons, really aren't that interested in image permanence testing anymore.  Perhaps the vast majority don't care or perhaps they simply feel that the issues have already been resolved to their satisfaction, or perhaps they feel it's still the vendor's responsibility to provide this information for free (well, you can see the limitations on how that works already). However, careful examination of the AaI&A light fade test results to date reveals that there is still much to understand about these new technologies, hence I press on.
> 
> So, there you have it. This group in particular has good reason to support testing of unique product combinations.  At the present time less than 1/10th of 1 percent of you are members, and if I can't ultimately win this group's support at much higher levels than that, then it's pretty unlikely that others would feel any more strongly about my research.
> 
> kind regards,
> 
> Mark
> http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

> I want to underline how valuable I think your work is. As I said above I had contacted the National Register of Historic Places and they accepted my Eboni 3MK on PremierArt paper as meeting their standards. 

Thanks so much for joining the AaI&A digital print research program. Please consider submitting a test sample of the R1800/Eboni 3MK on your PremierArt Paper. Paper choice can make a difference, and your PremierArt paper as I recall is OBA-free as compared to the HN photorag sample with Eboni 3MK now in test, so it deserves its own test.  Then we will also have an exact data set to bolster acceptance of this print process with institutions like the Nation Register of Historic Places. You will find both color and monochrome test targets (obviously you only need to print the monochrome target) in the testing.zip folder available to members at the AaI&A website on the "test results" page.

> I never thought I'd hear myself saying this but I now believe these Eboni carbon prints are more archival than the darkroom prints. Your work will strengthen my case as I work with architects and preservation groups. Thanks for your good work!

Agreed, traditional silver gelatin prints, especially when selenium, gold, or brown toned, are considered to be exceptionally lightfast, but ironically no one that I Know of has ever run a light fastness confirming test on them! Even if they are totally light fast, the usual image discoloration methods occurring in only a few decades are related to lack of thoroughness in "archival" processing procedures. Hence, full carbon inkjet prints have a very good chance of statistically outperforming. History will be the final arbitrar, but so far so good in my accelerated light fade tests for the R1800/ Eboni 3MK system!

Thanks again for joining my research team.

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

> 
> Paul
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@> wrote:
> > 
> > > Didn't mean to step on your question to Paul, but had some thoughts.. I hope he jumps in.
> > > Tyler
> > >
> > 
> > Oh boy, Tyler, you issued an invitation of sorts? Here's my story in a nutshell. I have been doing image permanence research for over 20 years. I love doing this kind of research because I love the history, science, and art of photography. I'm recognized in the museums and archives community as one of the "experts" in the field though I don't much like the term because I will never run out of new things to learn. My expertise in print permanence testing came through the conservation science and museum & archives community, only partly from my involvement directly with the imaging industry. I'm also an avid amateur photographer and printmaker for over 40 years. And yes, I know Henry Wilhelm very well.  I count him as a good friend, and we have collaborated on many research projects over the years including the development of the I* metric.  
> > 
> > All that said, I concluded in 2005 that in the long run, the only way to test the many interesting inkjet combinations that we as printmakers want to try, is to take control of the testing process ourselves.  Remove the manufacturers' direct underwriting of the testing and just do it ourselves.  I have establishied AaI&A to this purpose and also to conduct new real-world studies of modern digital prints as well. I have also adopted the latest and best test methods since I have no legacy issues, political or otherwise to contend with. Companies and institutions are also welcome to participate by sponsoring group memberships rather than actual tests, but they can't control what the total membership elects to test, so the testing will always remain truly independent.  
> > 
> > Essentially, the AaI&A business model relies on end-users to fund the research. It's a "consumer reports" type of model rather than a "laboratory testing services" type of business model. I've seeded the AaI&A program with my knowledge, labor, and personal capital for over three years now, but very soon some solid end-user support is going to have to kick in or I will have to finally conclude that printmakers, for whatever reasons, really aren't that interested in image permanence testing anymore.  Perhaps the vast majority don't care or perhaps they simply feel that the issues have already been resolved to their satisfaction, or perhaps they feel it's still the vendor's responsibility to provide this information for free (well, you can see the limitations on how that works already). However, careful examination of the AaI&A light fade test results to date reveals that there is still much to understand about these new technologies, hence I press on.
> > 
> > So, there you have it. This group in particular has good reason to support testing of unique product combinations.  At the present time less than 1/10th of 1 percent of you are members, and if I can't ultimately win this group's support at much higher levels than that, then it's pretty unlikely that others would feel any more strongly about my research.
> > 
> > kind regards,
> > 
> > Mark
> > http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
> >
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:
>
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> 
> Thanks so much for joining the AaI&A digital print research program. Please consider submitting a test sample of the R1800/Eboni 3MK on your PremierArt Paper. Paper choice can make a difference, and your PremierArt paper as I recall is OBA-free as compared to the HN photorag sample with Eboni 3MK now in test, so it deserves its own test.

Yes, PremierArt Fine Art has no OBA's but they also make a PremierArt Bright White which does contain OBA's. I like the bright white but again for archival reasons I chose the Fine Art variety. I'll download the .zip file and proceed with that. May be a few days. Thank you for being willing to test this combination. I'm using that paper because for a long time it was Paul Roark's preferred paper for regular use. 

Just curious... is the Hyde House on the Register? Certainly looks like it would qualify!

I look forward to being part of your team. I'd really like to solidify these procedures with the folks at the National Register. Their website actually invites the public to submit new procedures as even they admit they cannot keep up with all the changes. Evidently they value input from people like us.

Paul

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

> Just curious... is the Hyde House on the Register? Certainly looks like it would qualify!
> 
> I look forward to being part of your team. I'd really like to solidify these procedures with the folks at the National Register. Their website actually invites the public to submit new procedures as even they admit they cannot keep up with all the changes. Evidently they value input from people like us.
> 
> Paul
>

Yes, indeed it is.

Mark

Mark,

 

I also just joined!

Thanks for your work and participating in this online group.  

 

Gary Wagner

www.garywagner.com

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 1:25 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Aardenburg Imaging Fade Tests

 

  
So, there you have it. This group in particular has good reason to support
testing of unique product combinations. At the present time less than 1/10th
of 1 percent of you are members, and if I can't ultimately win this group's
support at much higher levels than that, then it's pretty unlikely that
others would feel any more strongly about my research.

kind regards,

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

> > ...  PremierArt paper as I recall is OBA-free as compared to
> > the HN photorag sample with Eboni 3MK now in test, so 
> > it deserves its own test.
> 
> Yes, PremierArt Fine Art has no OBA's ...

The 205 weight is the Premier Imaging version of Epson Premier Art Scrapbook paper.  Epson's website relating to the paper claims it is its most archival paper.  In my fade testing inks on this paper did better than on any other paper.  Oddly, the 205 weight did better than the heavier version.

> they also make a PremierArt Bright White which does contain OBA's...

It is said to be the same paper but with OBAs.  I use it for my "neutral-cool" prints with dilute Eboni.  It has the characteristic that the change is Lab B is held down more than any other coated paper. With the old 7500 this resulted in a 100% carbon print where the Lab B never became positive -- i.e., actually a "cool" 100% carbon print.  In more modern printers the smaller dots print warmer.  Still  with the 7800 the Lab B is below 1 at 50%.  

Premier Imaging claims that the OBAs in its Smooth BW paper meet the old silver print standards for brighteners.  But, I'd expect them to fade, turning the paper into, in effect, the Scrapbook paper.  An interesting question is whether the OBAs really do affect the image permanence. That would be a good comparison test.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Gary " <gary@...> wrote:
>
> Mark,
> 
>  
> 
> I also just joined!
> 
> Thanks for your work and participating in this online group.  
> 
>  
> 
> Gary Wagner

Thanks you, Gary, Paul, and others in this group who have just joined the AaI&A digital print research program. 

BTW, I managed to get all of my new test reports uploaded to the AaI&A website tonight (except the very last one which I will do next)...inspired by the new members! So, to see test results for Paul Roark's magic R1800/Eboni 3MK system in the AaI&A database, go to the test results page and click on the link to the light fade test results. Then, look for sample # AaI_20090803_SN001 in the "Test Report" column of the list. Sort by clicking on the column field name "Test Report" once or twice to get it into ascending/descending order. That should allow you to find this test report pretty quickly. It can also be found relatively easily by sorting on the "printer" category and looking for Epson R1800.

Again, thanks to all.

Mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:
>
> 
 
> Mark,
> 
> Will your Eboni 3MK tests include several kinds of paper? As I noted above, I'm using PremierArt Fine Art Paper Matt. They describe it as a rag paper with a 100% cotton base, "naturally acid and lignin free and buffered for added stability", and using no OBA's.
> 
> I will definitely send in my membership Monday morning, I want to support this valuable work you are doing. And I appreciate your presence here, in this forum.
> 
> Paul W.
>

I see that I'm answering a little out of order, but that's OK. The Eboni 3MK is a very impressive system. It would be good to test this inkset with other papers, so I"m game if people want to submit. I do have an R1800 personally in my printing lab, but I need to reserve it for the OEM inkset in case other new papers of interest need to be tested, but after seeing the submitted print sample (and a pictorial print that was also kindly donated to the Aardenburg Archives to go along with the test prints, I'm sorely tempted to convert my R1800 over to this inkset!

One other thing to mention...with coated papers, the paper base (cotton, alpha cellulose, RC, etc) has a much lesser role in print permanence. Unless the paper core is absolutely loaded with lignin and highly acidic, it's the coating adhesion and coating chemistry interacting with the ink where all the action is!

thanks,
Mark

I have been in touch the last six months with Mark's efforts and hard work in this area of inkjet longevity testing and have contributed many print samples myself. 

I can only say that what he is doing now is exactly what so many of us who do this kind of print imaging for a living had dreamed of for the last decade. 

Since he is not being supported by the big three printer/ink manufacturers, and therefore is not in the position to be influenced by their marketing needs, (or, anyone else's marketing needs as far as that goes) what he is doing is of great value to us all.

So, you guys out there, whether you are artists, print studios, or university departments, please consider joining his site and supporting this continued research. He can't do it all alone.  Personally I think what he is doing is historic. We may not always like what we hear from this form of neutral observer testing, but we need to hear it. And, this isn't just an ink situation I'm talking about, it is equally a media selection situation. 

We need more tests and in my opinion he is the qualified guy to be encouraging to do them. Please join and stay in touch with his website as things progress. We'll all learn something.

John

deanimaging.com

pr_roark schreef:

> Oddly, the 205 weight did better than the heavier version.

Intrigues me but too many variables:

It can be an accidental difference between batches.
It can be the result of the changed weight relation between inkjet 
coating and paper base and their different behaviour ro display.

Less components in the thickness of the paper to change color?
Faster reaching its endpoint for color change = a substantial part 
happening before the test already?
Depends on the method of color measuring too,  I guess it is with a 
black, grey or white panel behind it and not with multiple samples of 
the same paper, exposed or not.
I expect Mark will have taken out irregularities due to measuring.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst


Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

Paul, thank your very much for starting this thread.

I founded my company to help people frame digital prints so needless to say this topic is of concern to me and many of my customers. I am happy to discover Aardenburg Imaging and Mark; I will be contacting you in the near future about helping to support our organization. I will also be spreading the word among my customer base to help increase your membership.

Cheers,
Mark
President, Frame Destination, Inc.
http://www.framedestination.com/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@> wrote:
> 
> > Didn't mean to step on your question to Paul, but had some thoughts.. I hope he jumps in.
> > Tyler
> >
> 
> Oh boy, Tyler, you issued an invitation of sorts? Here's my story in a nutshell. I have been doing image permanence research for over 20 years. I love doing this kind of research because I love the history, science, and art of photography. I'm recognized in the museums and archives community as one of the "experts" in the field though I don't much like the term because I will never run out of new things to learn. My expertise in print permanence testing came through the conservation science and museum & archives community, only partly from my involvement directly with the imaging industry. I'm also an avid amateur photographer and printmaker for over 40 years. And yes, I know Henry Wilhelm very well.  I count him as a good friend, and we have collaborated on many research projects over the years including the development of the I* metric.  
> 
cropped

> Mark
> http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>

Ernst Dinkla <edinkla@...> wrote:
>
> pr_roark schreef:
> 
> > Oddly, the 205 weight did better than the heavier version.
> 
> Intrigues me but too many variables: ...

I agree it's not a solid, 100% result.  While I tried to eliminate as many variables as possible by only comparing results from the same test session, rotating the light to be sure there was no unevenness there, aging all the samples to eliminate the "cure" (initial changes), still, I see my results as more "suggestive" than solid proof.

Consistent with my results is that the H. Photo Rag 188 seems to have, on average, had less of a change in the paper base than the HPR 308 in the Aardenburg tests.  I didn't compare same-inkset ink fade results, if they even exist.  Again, I'm not sure at all this is a significant result aside from it showing, perhaps, that the thinner paper should not be seen as a negative in terms of light fastness.  

Initially I'd assumed that the thicker papers would do better.  That just does not appear to be true.

I wonder if Epson still stands by its statements (still on it's web page) that the Scrapbook paper (205 gsm) is its most archival paper.  It's also one of the cheapest cotton papers at Atlex.com.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Good work Mark. I became a paying member today. Hopefully everyone  
here will do the same.

I would be very interested in seeing data for the Cone Color K3 ink on  
Hahn Photo Rag 308 and Museo Portfolio Rag. I can send these samples  
from UVM's 4800 printers if others would like to send 4880 and 9880  
samples *using the Cone Color K3 vivid. I haven't seen data yet on  
these inks and am really needing to before I feel entirely comfortable  
with'em.

It was good to see the Piezography Portfolio Black under-printing fade  
data up there. That was something I was needing confirmation on.

All the best,
Walker

Mark,
Might I make a suggestion. I know we are all very technical and scientific on this e-group and you are very technical and scientific about your testing, but reading the results might be a bit confusing or just plain not understandable to the layman. How about a one or two sentence summary at the top of the PDF with your best "down to earth" wording. Perhaps "as of this date I have found the following paper ink combination to be fading fast/slow/not at all" or something like that? Seeing certain numbers going down might be acceptable to some, but others might see it as a big fade issue. I.E... give us your personal feeling.

Unscientifically,
Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Dec 6, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Walker Blackwell wrote:

> Good work Mark. I became a paying member today. Hopefully everyone  
> here will do the same.
> 
> I would be very interested in seeing data for the Cone Color K3 ink on  
> Hahn Photo Rag 308 and Museo Portfolio Rag. I can send these samples  
> from UVM's 4800 printers if others would like to send 4880 and 9880  
> samples *using the Cone Color K3 vivid. I haven't seen data yet on  
> these inks and am really needing to before I feel entirely comfortable  
> with'em.
> 
> It was good to see the Piezography Portfolio Black under-printing fade  
> data up there. That was something I was needing confirmation on.
> 
> All the best,
> Walker

Yea, I kind of agree with that Mark. He has talked about possibly having some kind of question/answer blog up there as well, when members keep asking the same questions about the figures.  You know, ....what are the trends that are being seen at this juncture or that juncture and what are the real world ramifications to end users of the info as it comes in - those things such as,  are all oba's created equal, are all black and white systems showing the same trends on various media, etc. What products are more appropriate for what  kind of imagery. What inks are producing the most stable reds and yellows, etc , etc. 

This is all very good and I hope we can get a million people to join. He is trying to keep his membership fee low, but that means everyone needs to chip in in whatever way they can.

John


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:

>
> Mark,
> Might I make a suggestion. I know we are all very technical and scientific on this e-group and you are very technical and scientific about your testing, but reading the results might be a bit confusing or just plain not understandable to the layman. How about a one or two sentence summary at the top of the PDF with your best "down to earth" wording. Perhaps "as of this date I have found the following paper ink combination to be fading fast/slow/not at all" or something like that? Seeing certain numbers going down might be acceptable to some, but others might see it as a big fade issue. I.E... give us your personal feeling.
> 
> Unscientifically,
> Mark
> http://www.stillrivereditions.com
> 
> On Dec 6, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Walker Blackwell wrote:
> 
> > Good work Mark. I became a paying member today. Hopefully everyone  
> > here will do the same.
> > 
> > I would be very interested in seeing data for the Cone Color K3 ink on  
> > Hahn Photo Rag 308 and Museo Portfolio Rag. I can send these samples  
> > from UVM's 4800 printers if others would like to send 4880 and 9880  
> > samples *using the Cone Color K3 vivid. I haven't seen data yet on  
> > these inks and am really needing to before I feel entirely comfortable  
> > with'em.
> > 
> > It was good to see the Piezography Portfolio Black under-printing fade  
> > data up there. That was something I was needing confirmation on.
> > 
> > All the best,
> > Walker
>

Yes, Paul, thanks for getting this discussion started. It has now helped to make a potentially valuable connection for both AaI&A and Frames Destination.

Mark (at Frames Destination), please visit the following page on my website and you will likely recognize one of your products. I've been using your company's frames in a number of my real-world print monitoring experiments and other projects as well. Affordable and great customer service, plus room to squeeze in my environmental dataloggers. Can't beat that!

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/realworldprintmonitoring.html

Mark, also please check out the homepage of my site. Pro-Imaging.org became my first group sponsor a few months ago. My belief is that group sponsorships probably hold the key to AaI&A's survival.  Companies, photography clubs, and other institutions with no "dog in the hunt" other than wanting to provide their constituency with informed answers to their print permanence and conservation framing questions, have good reason to become group sponsors in the AaI&A digital print research program.

I look forward to hearing from you.

kind regards,

Mark McCormick-Goodhart
Director, Aardenburg Imaging & Archives
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mrgs1001" <mrgs1001@...> wrote:

>
> Paul, thank your very much for starting this thread.
> 
> I founded my company to help people frame digital prints so needless to say this topic is of concern to me and many of my customers. I am happy to discover Aardenburg Imaging and Mark; I will be contacting you in the near future about helping to support our organization. I will also be spreading the word among my customer base to help increase your membership.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark
> President, Frame Destination, Inc.
> http://www.framedestination.com/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Walker Blackwell <forums@...> wrote:

> 
> I would be very interested in seeing data for the Cone Color K3 ink on  
> Hahn Photo Rag 308 and Museo Portfolio Rag. I can send these samples  
> from UVM's 4800 printers if others would like to send 4880 and 9880  
> samples *using the Cone Color K3 vivid. I haven't seen data yet on  
> these inks and am really needing to before I feel entirely comfortable  
> with'em.
>
>

By all means. Looking forward to having both Conecolor K3 and K3 vivid samples in test. HN photo Rag seems to the the universal favorite and many samples are now in the database. Happy to take other papers into testing as well with this ink set, but HN PhotoRag should pave the way for some apples-to-apples comparisons between OEM ink sets and third party sets like the Conecolor inks.

Mark,

Your point is very well taken, and I've been giving it serious thought lately as to how to improve the AaI&A experience for members who aren't and perhaps don't even want to be steeped in all the technical details. My favorite bumper sticker I ever saw was on a Volkwagon Beetle. It said "Don't Honk, I'm peddling as fast as I can".

In fact, I'm currently working on a "Year End Summary" report for members (will be a green link document on my site) in which my goal is to lay out the basic trends and results I've seen in the research conducted over this past year. This summary should probably become an annual tradition much like an annual report for "stockholders".  And written with the typical photographer or printmaker in mind not the color science gurus.

Also, I'm thinking about adding a basic group of tutorials, perhaps even venturing into the whole video clip delivery (I will need to buy a "Mr. Rogers, welcome to my neighborhood" sweater, don't you think?). Subjects, like "What are Megalux hours anyway", "Straight talk about OBAs", "Conservation Myths and Legends", etc.

A little background here if I may. I created the AaI&A test reports to have very strong scientific defenses against technical criticisms from imaging experts who might choose to cry foul against the I* metric as being currently "unblessed" by the scientific community. It's a chicken and egg problem. The metric won't ever get accepted if it isn't used, and because I'm the inventor, I'm willing to put my money (and my scientific reputation) where my mouth is and start the "vetting" ball rolling in the right direction...hence AaI&A's use of the I* metric in a new and advanced light fade testing protocol.  But to mitigate potential  criticism, I deliberately include all the raw CIELAB data and classic delta E values as well. So, for the experts who are uncomfortable with the I* metric, they can simply use the raw data and perform whatever additional analyses that suit their purposes.  The downside, of course, to all that included information is that the test reports look like a scary read to the lay person.

That said, the I* metric was conceived as a figure of merit (FOM) that will ultimately be much easier for the average person to understand. Delta E and L*, a*, and b* values that often creep into our conversations are definitely not user friendly, and have serious technical shortcomings when applied to color errors in the context of real images.  But I* scores are easy to understand, IMHO, with just one of two minor caveats. After extensive confirmation studies over the last few years, I'm convinced the percentile ranking scale is working very well, and quite like a traditional grade point average (GPA) scale. Hence, 90% and above is excellent tone and color retention, 80% good, 70% satisfactory, 60% poor. The laymen can take this at face value without having to understand any of the underlying mathematics.  Of course, like any concerned parent, one may choose to set higher or lower standards, i.e. deciding that 70% just isn't satisfactory enough where your "child" is concerned.  But nonetheless the laymen ultimately will be better served by I* scores than by color difference equations or percent density loss figures.

Anyway,  I'm actually enjoying the goal of trying to bring complicated concepts in imaging science and conservation science down to earth while at the same avoiding the "dumb it down" marketing approach that often leads to utter silly nonsense. I know I still have a long way to go.

cheers,

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:

>
> Mark,
> Might I make a suggestion. I know we are all very technical and scientific on this e-group and you are very technical and scientific about your testing, but reading the results might be a bit confusing or just plain not understandable to the layman. How about a one or two sentence summary at the top of the PDF with your best "down to earth" wording. Perhaps "as of this date I have found the following paper ink combination to be fading fast/slow/not at all" or something like that? Seeing certain numbers going down might be acceptable to some, but others might see it as a big fade issue. I.E... give us your personal feeling.
> 
> Unscientifically,
> Mark
> http://www.stillrivereditions.com

Mark(1?), I have spent some time with Mark(2?)'s info, very interested at first, then taken over by a lazy ADD type of attitude that never lets me complete his docs. I've decided, until I can commit to it, to use his I*Metric as the main comparison criteria, since it seems the most valid to me. So, all I do is click on that header in the test results chart on line, and it puts all the results in order of performance, very informative. Then, if I need more specific info, I download the specific test's pdf, for example to see what patches were the most problematic in a sample I submitted, etc..
As much as people want a simple statement- your print will last XX years- it's dangerous to make these unlikely predictions, it's too bad a precident was set long ago that leads to the expectation of such statements, and I think it's wise of Mark(2) to not go there..
In "An Overview of the AaI&A Conservation Display Ratings" from his site, there is a way to convert his I*Metric rating to a longevity prediction in a given environment.
We're stuck with wanting to simplify complex information... always a problem...
At least he gave us neato headers to click and stuff... hehe... hehe... coool...
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:

>
> Mark,
> Might I make a suggestion. I know we are all very technical and scientific on this e-group and you are very technical and scientific about your testing, but reading the results might be a bit confusing or just plain not understandable to the layman. How about a one or two sentence summary at the top of the PDF with your best "down to earth" wording. Perhaps "as of this date I have found the following paper ink combination to be fading fast/slow/not at all" or something like that? Seeing certain numbers going down might be acceptable to some, but others might see it as a big fade issue. I.E... give us your personal feeling.
> 
> Unscientifically,
> Mark
> http://www.stillrivereditions.com
> 
> On Dec 6, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Walker Blackwell wrote:
> 
> > Good work Mark. I became a paying member today. Hopefully everyone  
> > here will do the same.
> > 
> > I would be very interested in seeing data for the Cone Color K3 ink on  
> > Hahn Photo Rag 308 and Museo Portfolio Rag. I can send these samples  
> > from UVM's 4800 printers if others would like to send 4880 and 9880  
> > samples *using the Cone Color K3 vivid. I haven't seen data yet on  
> > these inks and am really needing to before I feel entirely comfortable  
> > with'em.
> > 
> > It was good to see the Piezography Portfolio Black under-printing fade  
> > data up there. That was something I was needing confirmation on.
> > 
> > All the best,
> > Walker
>

Hello again, Mark,

Glad to see the high activity in this thread, looks like we're all on to something very important.

You'll recall you invited me to submit some test prints using the R1800/PremierArt Fine Art paper/MIS Eboni ink combination. I've made the prints and am now looking at your pdf form to fill out. I do have a couple of technical questions... is it more appropriate I e-mail with you at your site, phone in my questions Monday, or take them up here, where others might benefit?. The questions have to with 1) the imbedded Gray Gamma 2.2 layer imbedded in your test prints and 2) the ICC profile section of your form... my process uses .quad files, which are generated by QTRIP from .qidf files on Paul Roark's website.

Guess I've already half-asked them!

Paul


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Walker Blackwell <forums@> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I would be very interested in seeing data for the Cone Color K3 ink on  
> > Hahn Photo Rag 308 and Museo Portfolio Rag. I can send these samples  
> > from UVM's 4800 printers if others would like to send 4880 and 9880  
> > samples *using the Cone Color K3 vivid. I haven't seen data yet on  
> > these inks and am really needing to before I feel entirely comfortable  
> > with'em.
> >
> >
> 
> By all means. Looking forward to having both Conecolor K3 and K3 vivid samples in test. HN photo Rag seems to the the universal favorite and many samples are now in the database. Happy to take other papers into testing as well with this ink set, but HN PhotoRag should pave the way for some apples-to-apples comparisons between OEM ink sets and third party sets like the Conecolor inks.
>

Tyler,
Mark here, lets just call me Savoia for now. OK, this is going to sound insane, but for all the times I have looked at the info on their website I never ever knew of those hidden columns to the right in my browser window. I just never noticed I could scroll right. This is the sound of me hitting forehead with my hand, stupid(slap) - stupid(slap) - stupid(slap). I would just download the PDFs. I guess we get use to most websites either being more of a vertical format or the content would fit left to right automatically. Geez.

OK, now to get back to life within my browsers constraints :) You CAN teach an old dog new tricks.
Savoia

http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Dec 6, 2009, at 4:13 PM, tboleyyh wrote:

> Mark(1?), I have spent some time with Mark(2?)'s info, very interested at first, then taken over by a lazy ADD type of attitude that never lets me complete his docs. I've decided, until I can commit to it, to use his I*Metric as the main comparison criteria, since it seems the most valid to me. So, all I do is click on that header in the test results chart on line, and it puts all the results in order of performance, very informative. Then, if I need more specific info, I download the specific test's pdf, for example to see what patches were the most problematic in a sample I submitted, etc..
> As much as people want a simple statement- your print will last XX years- it's dangerous to make these unlikely predictions, it's too bad a precident was set long ago that leads to the expectation of such statements, and I think it's wise of Mark(2) to not go there..
> In "An Overview of the AaI&A Conservation Display Ratings" from his site, there is a way to convert his I*Metric rating to a longevity prediction in a given environment.
> We're stuck with wanting to simplify complex information... always a problem...
> At least he gave us neato headers to click and stuff... hehe... hehe... coool...
> Tyler

What I'm really interested in is how ABW prints might shift color  
between different papers/printer combos vs MIS and Piezography inks as  
they fade under light. This is almost a larger concern than black fade  
for me. As long as black fade is consistent and slopes off (ie: slows  
down) on an even curve, I'm ok with it. But if different tones start  
hueing out of control, then it's time to chuck that printer/ink/paper  
combo out the window. (ABW testing is really important for the  
industry, I think, because most people and even universities are  
teaching with Epson printers and ABW setups for intro BW classes.  
Silver is being shut down in replace of an untested driver setting!!)

For those sending color samples to Mark MG, maybe we should strive to  
send top-quality (ie: Linearized with CreateICC) ABW and QTR prints as  
well so we all can start to build a concrete dataset and be able to  
make decisions based on that. It will tell us what combos to not focus  
on and what combos to really strive to perfect. Silver Rag on K3 4800  
looks really promising. I'm going to print Cone Color K3 on Silver Rag  
to send to Mark so we can all see how the two inks compete.

For example, what is the hue longevity difference between an 11880 ABW  
print on HPR 308 vs the 3800? What about the 9900? What is the  
difference between ABW on the 11880 vs a CMYK+ toned print from  
StudioPrint on the Roland printers using the quad cone ink with Museum  
K?

There is such complexity in how inks are overlapped and so many  
combinations of paper and ink out there; it's been such an impossible  
idea that none of us have really thought we could ever know for sure  
what system of color/bw ink mixtures was better.

But now there is at least a glimmer of future possibility . . .

Mark, I have one suggestion. Maybe on the site you could put up a  
request board where you request swatch prints from your users. For  
example, I see a Lucia OEM / Harman FB AI test up. It would be useful  
to see the Epson 4800 K3 OEM test along side it but maybe it won't  
come until you request it of your users. eh?

Also, maybe it would be useful for those of us who end up using the  
site to have a user-profile area where we share the printer/inks we  
are using. This way we can see if, for example, a user has a 9900 and  
another user has a 3880. We can then coordinate our chart printing to,  
for example, all send you HPR QTR/ABW/Color swatches from our similar- 
generation printers so that you can begin the tests at the same time  
instead of waiting for someone randomly to come along with the  
comparable printer/ink/paper combo swatch. This way, you can also  
quickly see everyones swatch printing capabilities and make requests  
easier.

I hope enough funding comes through for this grand adventure Mark MG.

All the best,
Walker

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:
>
> Tyler,
> Mark here... ...This is the sound of me hitting forehead with my hand, stupid(slap) - stupid(slap) - stupid(slap). I would just download the PDFs. I guess we get use to most websites either being more...

Savoia, Boley here... my dirty little secret is that Mark actually showed me how to do that.. in person... I didn't have a clue....

mmmmmmm.... beeeeeeeeeeerrr....

I feel better now.

Homebrew beer tonight, mmmmmmmmmmm

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Dec 6, 2009, at 5:41 PM, tboleyyh wrote:

> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:
>> 
>> Tyler,
>> Mark here... ...This is the sound of me hitting forehead with my hand, stupid(slap) - stupid(slap) - stupid(slap). I would just download the PDFs. I guess we get use to most websites either being more...
> 
> Savoia, Boley here... my dirty little secret is that Mark actually showed me how to do that.. in person... I didn't have a clue....
> 
> mmmmmmm.... beeeeeeeeeeerrr....
>

Hi Paul,

Normally, I'd say let's discuss off-line. Email me and also always feel free to call me. However, for others reading this thread and who may be interested in how this sample submission process works:

The goal of the AaI&A documentation forms is to help me write up the "Description" and "comments/notes" pages in each test report in such a way that other printmakers looking at it will understand how the print was made and ideally could replicate the whole setup if they wanted to.  When we are talking about the standard printer drivers supplied by the printer manufacturer, the documentation is relatively straight-forward, and I developed the form more or less with those drivers in mind.  However, when submitting members start to move into more "exotic" or less conventional workflows like specialized RIPs, third party inks custom blended, special coatings, etc., some of the items on the form may then become not applicable (e.g., profiles and rendering intents), and the actual steps used to make the print much harder to describe. The documentation process then gets much more challenging when this happens, not only for the submitting member but for me to translate into the report as well. 

So the main advice I can give to any members submitting test samples is this: The AaI&A documentation pages are a guide to the kind of information I need, but i"m happy to work with you in any way you'd like to submit the supporting documentation. Screenshots of your print menus are most helpful, and when i get them you will usually see them placed into the reports as well. You can email them or send a CD with the samples, whatever is easiest for you.  Also, any comments you'd like to share, etc. Anything to help someone who's not using your setup figure out what is needed to reproduce your results. A good example is in the MIS Eboni 3MK test report. I was provided with a URL to the Shutterbug Magazine article about the process by the submitting member (you can probably guess who that was). I hyperlinked it in the report.  That type of supplemental information is highly instructive and will help to make the test results and the Aardenburg Archives a richer resource for photo historians in the future as well. 

I also openly and shamelessly request pictorial examples of the process, signed or unsigned by the artist, but sending me pictorial prints made the same way as the test samples is entirely optional, definitely not mandatory. The donated prints are becoming the core of a growing archive of 21st century digital printing processes.



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> Hello again, Mark,
> 
> Glad to see the high activity in this thread, looks like we're all on to something very important.
> 
> You'll recall you invited me to submit some test prints using the R1800/PremierArt Fine Art paper/MIS Eboni ink combination. I've made the prints and am now looking at your pdf form to fill out. I do have a couple of technical questions... is it more appropriate I e-mail with you at your site, phone in my questions Monday, or take them up here, where others might benefit?. The questions have to with 1) the imbedded Gray Gamma 2.2 layer imbedded in your test prints and 2) the ICC profile section of your form... my process uses .quad files, which are generated by QTRIP from .qidf files on Paul Roark's website.
> 
> Guess I've already half-asked them!
> 
> Paul
>

I had no idea you could do that with the tables either. Duh. The website is more sophisticated than us viewers.

Before we get too deep into the various drivers and rips of K3 printers, I want to see what happens to ALL the ink formulations of what he has already started and already has samples in house for when they reach the top limits of the conservation rating. 

But I am super curious about Cone Color as Walker is, because it is being sold much cheaper than Ultrachrome.

But -  my main curiosity is black and white because I think that has become the most mysterious, especially when it comes to the way Wilhelm and others have discussed it in the past.

In other words when an ink on a rag paper moves beyond 90% of this I metric upper exposure rating or 80% above the lower level measure, when the total megalux hour exposure is only say 40 megalux hours, then you need to think seriously about the system you are using.  Forty megalux is equal to a 20 year Wilhelm year rating, which is nothing really. So when we start to see bad things happening at 40megalux, 60 mexalux , and 80 megalux exposures it is time to be extremely concerned about monochrome color shift. And that is the thing we have fought over for the last 4 or 5 years on this forum with very little data to confirm our positions.

There are going to be all kinds of subtle variations between even the same inks and similar media, but what I'm looking for is -  larger patterns - patterns of similar failure of the same ink set or media provided by different members, in comparison to patterns of other ink and media tested under the same exact conditions. 

Once he sees the trends of all these systems side by side we are going to have a hell of a lot to talk about, more info than we ever had to evaluate black and white inkjet up until now.

john



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:

>
> I feel better now.
> 
> Homebrew beer tonight, mmmmmmmmmmm
> 
> Mark
> http://www.stillrivereditions.com
> 
> On Dec 6, 2009, at 5:41 PM, tboleyyh wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Tyler,
> >> Mark here... ...This is the sound of me hitting forehead with my hand, stupid(slap) - stupid(slap) - stupid(slap). I would just download the PDFs. I guess we get use to most websites either being more...
> > 
> > Savoia, Boley here... my dirty little secret is that Mark actually showed me how to do that.. in person... I didn't have a clue....
> > 
> > mmmmmmm.... beeeeeeeeeeerrr....
> >
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Walker Blackwell <forums@...> wrote:
>
> What I'm really interested in is how ABW prints might shift color  
> between different papers/printer combos vs MIS and Piezography inks as  
> they fade under light. This is almost a larger concern than black fade  
> for me. As long as black fade is consistent and slopes off (ie: slows  
> down) on an even curve, I'm ok with it. But if different tones start  
> hueing out of control, then it's time to chuck that printer/ink/paper  
> combo out the window.

Right, which is why I* color is broken out from I* tone. I* color tracks hue and chroma retention while I* tone scores lightness and contrast retention. And it weights low chroma color (e.g monochrome prints) versus high chroma color whereas delta E has no such weighting function That means to interpret the seriousness of hue shifting in low chroma colors with delta E versus errors in more vivid colors contained in full color prints, one has to make "expert" judgements.  I* color takes care of it automatically. Color shifting will wreak havoc with I* color scores while lightness and contrast errors bring I* tone scores down. We don't get that level of interpretation by looking at delta E averages.

> For those sending color samples to Mark MG, maybe we should strive to  
> send top-quality (ie: Linearized with CreateICC) ABW and QTR prints as  
> well so we all can start to build a concrete dataset and be able to  
> make decisions based on that. It will tell us what combos to not focus  
> on and what combos to really strive to perfect. Silver Rag on K3 4800  
> looks really promising. I'm going to print Cone Color K3 on Silver Rag  
> to send to Mark so we can all see how the two inks compete.

 If initial print quality is not at least satisfactory, I reject the sample for testing. It has happened only once sp far ( I then worked with the member to correct the problem), but the essential goal is to get representative print samples into test, ones that reflect the basic initial quality potential of the process.
> 
> 
> There is such complexity in how inks are overlapped and so many  
> combinations of paper and ink out there; it's been such an impossible  
> idea that none of us have really thought we could ever know for sure  
> what system of color/bw ink mixtures was better.
> 
> But now there is at least a glimmer of future possibility . . .

Yes, the combinations and permutations are nearly endless, but the AaI&A digital print research program is dedicated to tackling this challenge.  I just need about 25 members for every test I run to break even on these tests, and I"m no where near this membership/sample ratio yet.
> 
> Mark, I have one suggestion. Maybe on the site you could put up a  
> request board where you request swatch prints from your users. For  
> example, I see a Lucia OEM / Harman FB AI test up. It would be useful  
> to see the Epson 4800 K3 OEM test along side it but maybe it won't  
> come until you request it of your users. eh?

I haven't said much about this on my site yet, but in a way I'm starting to coordinate this type of very fruitful activity already. For example, an AaI&A member upgraded to an Epson 7900 but also owns a 4800. He requested to submit samples of the new HDR inks on a couple of papers, and I took the opportunity to request that he use the same paper  to submit both 4800 prints and 7900 prints on same paper batches. Then, I coordinated these samples in my testing so that they are running side-by-side. From a "design of experiments" perspective scientists call this a paired comparison test. It reduces all other potential variables to a minimum.  Those samples are going to give us our first hard look at whether the new Epson HDR ink set is better, worse, or dead even in overall performance with the older K3 inkset. Epson claims exact same performance which seems a little hard to believe, but then again, the current industry test protocol is based only on a single "limiting" factor and has no way of checking the new orange and green ink behavior. The I* metric and the AaI&A test method has no such limiting issues. Now, to let members Know about behind-the-scenes studies like this I have more work to do, but one way is with the "Replicates/Compare to" section on the report description page. I will soon put a notation in this box cross-referencing these samples if I haven't done so already. If at such time the test show positive differences, this type of testing will be good discussion for the AaI&A annual report to members, etc. We can do more of these types of member coordinated studies...all it takes is time and money! The programatic infrastructure to carry out this type of research is to a large degree already in place.
> 
> Also, maybe it would be useful for those of us who end up using the  
> site to have a user-profile area where we share the printer/inks we  
> are using. This way we can see if, for example, a user has a 9900 and  
> another user has a 3880. We can then coordinate our chart printing to,  
> for example, all send you HPR QTR/ABW/Color swatches from our similar- 
> generation printers so that you can begin the tests at the same time  
> instead of waiting for someone randomly to come along with the  
> comparable printer/ink/paper combo swatch. This way, you can also  
> quickly see everyones swatch printing capabilities and make requests  
> easier.
> 
Yes, profile sharing, and other member intiatives could be dove-tailed into the AaI&A activities. It's all possible. But is takes real effort. No free lunch.

> I hope enough funding comes through for this grand adventure Mark MG.

 I have high hopes, but in this economy it has been a real struggle to work on a new venture. An end-user driven testing program was a fundamental goal when I founded AaI&A in 2007. I've made a lot of progress, but now it's time for the photographic and printmaking community to "speak now or forever hold it's peace" as the saying goes.

best,

Mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>  ....it's the coating adhesion and coating chemistry interacting with the ink where all the action is!..

This has to be stressed over and over. All you have to do is go through the results, and see the differences between the various high end fine art papers with the same ink sets. Some consistencies take shape, and the major difference has to be brand coating chemistry differences.
Even though it is currently scoring fairly well, but inconsistently, this is one reason I wish HPR was NOT the paper we use to look for inkset performance differences.  As a printer for others, I have had a lot of HPR go though my studio since it's introduction into the market. It is the most problematic paper I have ever worked with in terms of consistency, paper base hue and whiteness, dmax, ink load capability, etc... In addition, the yellowing associated with the visible creation of some sulfur compound in reaction to the coating and certain airborne chemicals seems much more common with HPR than other papers.
This has nothing to do with Mark, he tests what's submitted. Also, I don't mean to disparage the HPR information so far, not at all. It's scoring well with various setups, but it makes me nervous...
It will be interesting to start to see some of the uncoated results start to come in as well.
I hope Aardenberg finds enough support to stay healthy over time, as the more data we have to compare, from more combinations and time, the more useful the database becomes.
I can think of so many combinations to try... 
Tyler

Ok everybody. Here is what I would suggest. Mark needs about 25 new  
members/test. To me, this is a very steep business curve (not that I'm  
an expert only owning a very small business of my own). So I would  
suggest to all the professional photographers, professors, students,  
and everyone else to get the word out that there's a new testing  
facility in town and that it needs our/your support to get running  
good. If we can gather a community around it, than maybe we can  
strengthen our own profession/work as a whole and further the cause of  
what we do. That includes creating a print-process archive (a side- 
note of Mark's in an earlier post.)

I agree with Tyler on HPR. I've lost thousands of dollars in both  
direct HPR costs (ie: paper going bad and not recouped by Hahnemuhle)  
and probably tens of thousands more (it's too painful to even do the  
accounting on this) in lost print-jobs because of yellowing problems  
in Chicago *not in lab where we have air purifiers, but out-of-lab.

HPR has the best dMax and least flaking and drag-line (ie: Innova  
Cotton Rag) issues of any Cotton rag paper out there with Piezography  
inks on matte paper. That's why I use it. But it has so many  
permanence problems that I vote to focus on some other more stable  
paper. Maybe at this point in this forum and a few others we can start  
to make our voices heard and look for another standard. HPR has been  
around for a long time and it has had as many problems for a long  
time. While its surface quality control is great (everyone here as  
probably seen the fish-scaling of Moab duo and Innova SC in the shadow  
tones on some paper batches am I right?) I no longer recommend it for  
serious archival work because I've been burned too many times. While  
ink-fade and shift is a really critical part of the equation, the more  
immediate problems I face as a digital print-maker are paper surface  
degradation problems. These things crop up in a few weeks to a few  
years and are absolutely devastating to both our profession and our  
clients. I understand this is a whole other world of science, but I  
would like to see a paper that starts off stable. I guess I would be  
ok with HPR though if the majority agreed we should use that as a  
standard base for ink tests. I guess it's more about the inks than the  
paper and HPR seems dependable as far as fade results are concerned.  
In my opinion, it's just not a dependable paper-base outside of ink  
stability.

Walker

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Walker Blackwell <forums@...> wrote:
...
> HPR has the best dMax and least flaking and drag-line (ie: Innova  
> Cotton Rag) issues of any Cotton rag paper out there with Piezography  
> inks on matte paper. That's why I use it. But it has so many  
> permanence problems that I vote to focus on some other more stable  
> paper...

right now I'm trying to move my HPR customers to Canson Rag Photographique 310, or Premiere Art Generations Fine Art Alise.
The Canson gets the slight performance nod, but is more expensive. The Premiere Art really close in performance, and more economical. The Canson coating reacts with warms inks "prettier" like the H coatings, but that's subtle. Both have more robust, less delicate, coatings...
Both bear strong resemblance to HPR.
We need some initial results on any paper we decide on as a group standard I suppose, so this could take a while to work out.

Any interest outside this list that can be guilt tripped into membership should be hit hard. The wide format list is disgraceful, Luminos Landscape list and Large Format list equally shamefully non-responsive. Better still, it seems to me, any organizations we have relationships with should be hit for larger membership contributions.
Tyler

Well hell, I've used Photorag continuously for 12 years and I haven't experienced any of the issues you guys are talking about. It has always been a sure thing for me. I used it tonight like every other night with perfect results all around. I must have done a million prints on it. Lots of limited edition portfolios for years and years and I had less issues on Photorag 308 than anything else. Over and over.

It is also all over the world in the Canon and Hp forms, which are their major papers for this surface.

But if you want to  make something else the defacto smooth rag paper tell me what it is. What is your suggestion? Please not Innova for God's sake, and the Crane Portfolio Rag is beautiful but my cleints call it "warm" and the dmax is mediocre at best. 

Tell me what your standard is now and I'll start using it. Canson? Is that what it is now. How is their quality control panning out. Is it affordable?

Besides that, lets take a close look at those William Turner sample results that are in test now and see how that goes. No oba there. But that is never going to be a standard monochrome paper for most people. I love it, but it is just not going to be a universal photo surface.

John




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Walker Blackwell <forums@...> wrote:

>
> Ok everybody. Here is what I would suggest. Mark needs about 25 new  
> members/test. To me, this is a very steep business curve (not that I'm  
> an expert only owning a very small business of my own). So I would  
> suggest to all the professional photographers, professors, students,  
> and everyone else to get the word out that there's a new testing  
> facility in town and that it needs our/your support to get running  
> good. If we can gather a community around it, than maybe we can  
> strengthen our own profession/work as a whole and further the cause of  
> what we do. That includes creating a print-process archive (a side- 
> note of Mark's in an earlier post.)
> 
> I agree with Tyler on HPR. I've lost thousands of dollars in both  
> direct HPR costs (ie: paper going bad and not recouped by Hahnemuhle)  
> and probably tens of thousands more (it's too painful to even do the  
> accounting on this) in lost print-jobs because of yellowing problems  
> in Chicago *not in lab where we have air purifiers, but out-of-lab.
> 
> HPR has the best dMax and least flaking and drag-line (ie: Innova  
> Cotton Rag) issues of any Cotton rag paper out there with Piezography  
> inks on matte paper. That's why I use it. But it has so many  
> permanence problems that I vote to focus on some other more stable  
> paper. Maybe at this point in this forum and a few others we can start  
> to make our voices heard and look for another standard. HPR has been  
> around for a long time and it has had as many problems for a long  
> time. While its surface quality control is great (everyone here as  
> probably seen the fish-scaling of Moab duo and Innova SC in the shadow  
> tones on some paper batches am I right?) I no longer recommend it for  
> serious archival work because I've been burned too many times. While  
> ink-fade and shift is a really critical part of the equation, the more  
> immediate problems I face as a digital print-maker are paper surface  
> degradation problems. These things crop up in a few weeks to a few  
> years and are absolutely devastating to both our profession and our  
> clients. I understand this is a whole other world of science, but I  
> would like to see a paper that starts off stable. I guess I would be  
> ok with HPR though if the majority agreed we should use that as a  
> standard base for ink tests. I guess it's more about the inks than the  
> paper and HPR seems dependable as far as fade results are concerned.  
> In my opinion, it's just not a dependable paper-base outside of ink  
> stability.
> 
> Walker
>

John, although there hasn't been any study on it, I really think it's  
a pollution issue. I think there is something in the air in Chicago  
that kills HPR 308. Maybe Tyler has it out there too. I haven't ever  
seen yellowing happen in VT or inside Black Point in Chicago (and we  
have prints in there that have sat around for 5 or 6 years.) But that  
surface reacts to something and so-far there hasn't been much of a  
study on it. UV light exposure seems to get rid of most of the pee- 
yellow but not all. (Maybe it's off-gassing?) But I agree with you.  
The surface is great, consistent, good dark blacks, good gamut. It's a  
good product, except for a few really bothersome problems that I've  
come face to face with and that has effected my business negatively.

I'm excited about the Canson and hope to get some in in a few weeks.  
I've seen the surface and haven't had time to test it until after this  
semester is over.

all the best,
Walker





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I believe you, I just have looked for problems and never found any here.


I was trying to find bw data on Wilhem's site but Hahnemuhe  and Canson only paid for color tests so we don't have that info to compare with Hp Vivera Photorag and Epson K3 ABW black and white tests on Premier Art rag. Thats very unfortunate.

But on a side note - the Hahnemuhle color tests with K3 show the same figures for Photorag and Museum Etching for color. But that isn't what I wanted to see. 

john

Ditto

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Dec 6, 2009, at 9:03 PM, john wrote:

> Well hell, I've used Photorag continuously for 12 years and I  
> haven't experienced any of the issues you guys are talking about. It  
> has always been a sure thing for me. I used it tonight like every  
> other night with perfect results all around. I must have done a  
> million prints on it. Lots of limited edition portfolios for years  
> and years and I had less issues on Photorag 308 than anything else.  
> Over and over

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Walker Blackwell <forums@...> wrote:
>
> John, although there hasn't been any study on it, I really think it's  
> a pollution issue. I think there is something in the air in Chicago  
> that kills HPR 308. Maybe Tyler has it out there too. I haven't ever  
> seen yellowing happen in VT or inside Black Point in Chicago (and we  
> have prints in there that have sat around for 5 or 6 years.) But that  
> surface reacts to something and so-far there hasn't been much of a  
> study on it.

I tend to agree with this assessment. The severe discoloration problem has been witnessed and reported on HPR the most, but that anecdotal experience can be in part if not entirely explained by the popularity of this matte paper. There is a pretty strong connection with certain non-acrylic adhesives, and this adhesive off-gassing problem which induces the bright yellow (possibly elemental sulfur), light bleachable reaction has been reported on other matte papers as well. Whether those papers are simply rebranded HN materials and hence the problem confined to just one manufacture is not known, but I rather suspect that high sensitivity to gaseous pollutants is inherent in the nature of the microporous coating. This is an industry issue which has been around for over 10 years and apparently no one has gotten to the bottom of it yet. BTW, I've never seen reports of the bright yellow stains occurring on semigloss or glossy microporous papers, only the matte microporous papers. Anyone here seen it on a glossy photo type microporous paper?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:

> I was trying to find bw data on Wilhem's site but Hahnemuhe  and Canson only paid for color tests so we don't have that info to compare with Hp Vivera Photorag and Epson K3 ABW black and white tests on Premier Art rag. Thats very unfortunate.

I'd be willing to coordinate a "round robbin" test of a select group of papers with all three of the OEM B&W print drivers (Epson ABW, HP Vivera BW, and Canon Lucia BW 16bit plugin) on select papers such as the Premier Art paper that has come up in this thread more than once. I can produce the Canon Lucia B&W prints on an iPF8100 if others can make the HP and Epson prints. I would supply some sheets of paper to participants from the same stock so we'd eliminate that variable. It would be head-to-head ink results with the three OEM B&W solutions. We could create cool, neutral, and warm renderings on two or three selected paper types.  If any of the new AaI&A members (about a dozen of you from this forum signed up this weekend) or any of my existing members from this forum would like to give this "round robbin" testing a try, please contact me offline. If there is enough interest, we can get it going.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

john schreef:
> I believe you, I just have looked for problems and never found any here.
> 
> 
> I was trying to find bw data on Wilhem's site but Hahnemuhe  and Canson only paid for color tests so we don't have that info to compare with Hp Vivera Photorag and Epson K3 ABW black and white tests on Premier Art rag. Thats very unfortunate.
> 
> But on a side note - the Hahnemuhle color tests with K3 show the same figures for Photorag and Museum Etching for color. But that isn't what I wanted to see. 
> 
> john

We still use HPR. There has been the yellowing but it was an obvious 
case of air pollution indoors, a thing that happend about ten years ago 
and since then we know the issue but I have yet to see a customer that 
complained about it. It doesn't change color here and Eindhoven isn't 
known for its pure air in the Netherlands.

There have been issues in the past with both Photorag and German Etching 
.... coatings not even, high flaking grade, roll start embossing through 
layers, but that has been a thing of the past or is solved to a high 
degree. For example 3"rolls with a parallel core winding was an improvement.

The HP Hahenm\ufffdhle Smooth fine Art Paper is quite similar to Photorag but 
is 265 gr/m2 and has a slightly more natural color. I do not see a 
better image quality compared to Photorag but there are other opinions.

The few times I have replaced Photorag with Innova were not that 
successful, waves in the coating at one side of 44" rolls for example 
and that was for the total batch, had to wait for replacement rolls. But 
t looks like things improved there too.

Intellicoat had some art papers before they started the distribution of 
Crane and they still have them in their catalogue.  Magicl\ufffde Verona High 
Definition Rag 300. Anyone familiar with that paper? There were some 
prints on that paper on the Photokina 2008 and just on eyesight it 
looked very good. Got an award quite recently.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst


Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

I am interested and can contribute the Z3100 samples and NK7 samples ( to go along with the Photorag samples I already sent you).

John

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> 
> > I was trying to find bw data on Wilhem's site but Hahnemuhe  and Canson only paid for color tests so we don't have that info to compare with Hp Vivera Photorag and Epson K3 ABW black and white tests on Premier Art rag. Thats very unfortunate.
> 
> I'd be willing to coordinate a "round robbin" test of a select group of papers with all three of the OEM B&W print drivers (Epson ABW, HP Vivera BW, and Canon Lucia BW 16bit plugin) on select papers such as the Premier Art paper that has come up in this thread more than once. I can produce the Canon Lucia B&W prints on an iPF8100 if others can make the HP and Epson prints. I would supply some sheets of paper to participants from the same stock so we'd eliminate that variable. It would be head-to-head ink results with the three OEM B&W solutions. We could create cool, neutral, and warm renderings on two or three selected paper types.  If any of the new AaI&A members (about a dozen of you from this forum signed up this weekend) or any of my existing members from this forum would like to give this "round robbin" testing a try, please contact me offline. If there is enough interest, we can get it going.
> 
> cheers,
> Mark
> http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>

One of the primary reasons I had standardized  on Photorag 308 is that it was working universally great with all inks. The neutral monochrome prints were designed to be perfectly neutral on that paper from the beginning and the color gamut and dmax for color work beat everything else. The only thing I didn't do on it was sepia monochrome.

john



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla <edinkla@...> wrote:

>
> john schreef:
> > I believe you, I just have looked for problems and never found any here.
> > 
> > 
> > I was trying to find bw data on Wilhem's site but Hahnemuhe  and Canson only paid for color tests so we don't have that info to compare with Hp Vivera Photorag and Epson K3 ABW black and white tests on Premier Art rag. Thats very unfortunate.
> > 
> > But on a side note - the Hahnemuhle color tests with K3 show the same figures for Photorag and Museum Etching for color. But that isn't what I wanted to see. 
> > 
> > john
> 
> We still use HPR. There has been the yellowing but it was an obvious 
> case of air pollution indoors, a thing that happend about ten years ago 
> and since then we know the issue but I have yet to see a customer that 
> complained about it. It doesn't change color here and Eindhoven isn't 
> known for its pure air in the Netherlands.
> 
> There have been issues in the past with both Photorag and German Etching 
> .... coatings not even, high flaking grade, roll start embossing through 
> layers, but that has been a thing of the past or is solved to a high 
> degree. For example 3"rolls with a parallel core winding was an improvement.
> 
> The HP Hahenmühle Smooth fine Art Paper is quite similar to Photorag but 
> is 265 gr/m2 and has a slightly more natural color. I do not see a 
> better image quality compared to Photorag but there are other opinions.
> 
> The few times I have replaced Photorag with Innova were not that 
> successful, waves in the coating at one side of 44" rolls for example 
> and that was for the total batch, had to wait for replacement rolls. But 
> t looks like things improved there too.
> 
> Intellicoat had some art papers before they started the distribution of 
> Crane and they still have them in their catalogue.  Magiclée Verona High 
> Definition Rag 300. Anyone familiar with that paper? There were some 
> prints on that paper on the Photokina 2008 and just on eyesight it 
> looked very good. Got an award quite recently.
> 
> -- 
> Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst
> 
> 
> Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions
> 
> |      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
> |         www.pigment-print.com        |
> |                 ( unvollendet )                 |
>

Well. You have my vote for HPR. It still think it's the best "looking"  
matte paper out there. It's a tricky beast in the wild wooly polluted  
world, but as long as it is consistent with ink fade (which I think we  
can all agree it is) than it gets my vote.

Maybe Mueseo Silver Rag can be the gloss base paper?

Walker

Well we'll have to wait and see. We just don't know yet. It may be totally ink dependent  for performance and maybe not. What we may find out is that all of these ink receptor coatings have their limits when it comes to absorption of pollutants. The main reason Wilhelm always suggested keeping them behind glass, or spraying them. The irony is that the ugly plastic papers may function much better in that regard.

But correct me if I"m wrong but Mark's tests on Photorag haven't been going on long enough to show long term pollution aging?

I already sent in Photorag Baryta samples (non oba) that were sprayed with Premier Art.  But you're probably right, Silver Rag might be more universally used gloss fiber. Canon also markets it under their name.

john

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Walker Blackwell <forums@...> wrote:

>
> Well. You have my vote for HPR. It still think it's the best "looking"  
> matte paper out there. It's a tricky beast in the wild wooly polluted  
> world, but as long as it is consistent with ink fade (which I think we  
> can all agree it is) than it gets my vote.
> 
> Maybe Mueseo Silver Rag can be the gloss base paper?
> 
> Walker
>

On Dec 7, 2009, at 7:54 AM, Mark wrote:

> The severe discoloration problem has been witnessed and reported on  
> HPR the most, but that anecdotal experience can be in part if not  
> entirely explained by the popularity of this matte paper.

My most dramatic example of this was during the Anthrax scare, when  
mail passing through certain mail centers was have certain undisclosed  
safety precautions applied to it. I received a fine art matte paper  
profiling target print (don't recall if it was HPR, but there was a  
lot of HPR being used at that time) from a customer, only to find it  
was a surprisingly bright yellow. I requested a replacement target be  
FedExed to me, and that one came through the expected white tone. I  
believe the process in question may have been intense UV light applied  
to kill Anthrax spores, though it could have been a gas of some type.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I'd hasten to add, I've seen the same thing happen on German Etching, William Turner, Somerset Enhanced (or whatever they call it now), and some cheap Epson matte that was tossed in with the printer. I have no doubt it could show up on other coated matte materials. But they haven't been around long enough for stories to appear.
The HPR stories abound, quite possibly, because of the popularity of the paper as Mark suggested, but the horror stories out there are worrying and imply higher HPR sensitivity. It's more the batch problems, implying inconsistent starting points, incomparable black points, etc, along with the high contamination potential, that bugs me.
What if there is initial contamination of the paper maybe from shipping, causing inaccurate initial color data, that then cleans up during testing because of UV? But if I have anything to offer to the comparison samples batch, I'll use it if that's the consensus. Ditto on the Silver Rag suggestion, it's looking good in Mark's initial testing there.

Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:

>
> 
> On Dec 7, 2009, at 7:54 AM, Mark wrote:
> 
> > The severe discoloration problem has been witnessed and reported on  
> > HPR the most, but that anecdotal experience can be in part if not  
> > entirely explained by the popularity of this matte paper.
> 
> My most dramatic example of this was during the Anthrax scare, when  
> mail passing through certain mail centers was have certain undisclosed  
> safety precautions applied to it. I received a fine art matte paper  
> profiling target print (don't recall if it was HPR, but there was a  
> lot of HPR being used at that time) from a customer, only to find it  
> was a surprisingly bright yellow. I requested a replacement target be  
> FedExed to me, and that one came through the expected white tone. I  
> believe the process in question may have been intense UV light applied  
> to kill Anthrax spores, though it could have been a gas of some type.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Global Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> CDTobie@...
> 
> 
>   ----------
> 
> 
> 
> Datacolor
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

And people wonder why I'm pursuing Arches uncoated paper.

I understand that it's a niche that most might not be happy with, but I'm just not sure I trust any of the coatings to hold up for the long haul.  Not that the long haul is really that important for the vast majority of uses, but it makes me feel good to think that my images might be enjoyed by my ancestors and others many years from now.  Of course, I hope that collectors also think they'll last.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Ya, I'm still on simple double sided matte. I've not chased after any particular paper as I've never seen a reason. I can see that I can get more visual stimulation with the sample packs, but I can also wonder; "Who cares"?


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 12/7/2009 at 4:52 PM pr_roark wrote:

>And people wonder why I'm pursuing Arches uncoated paper.
>
>I understand that it's a niche that most might not be happy with, but I'm
>just not sure I trust any of the coatings to hold up for the long haul. 
>Not that the long haul is really that important for the vast majority of
>uses, but it makes me feel good to think that my images might be enjoyed
>by my ancestors and others many years from now.  Of course, I hope that
>collectors also think they'll last.
>
>Paul
>www.PaulRoark.com 
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> And people wonder why I'm pursuing Arches uncoated paper.

well I'm with you on that for all the obvious reasons. Though I'm not developing specific inksets for it, I print color on it that I love, mono on it with both Piezotones and highly toned UCK3, and also the old Somerset though it's been a few years for that. I intend to get back to it again next year.
But, as you also suggest, I've attracted very little interest in it, since it has a limited color palette and dmax, and a more opaque like surface quality. Most artists gravitate to the snappier look of coated papers.
I prefer the cold press, I think you are on hot press? I also like the non bright white version...
To nail it, a RIP is required with careful limiting and profiling.
I think you may have some tests in to Mark? I have some color and ABW UC tests just in as well, but it will be some time before they come up on line. I imagine Mark is now overwhelmed with sumbissions...

Anyway, the results of your work and the tests will be interesting to follow.
Tyler

ALL pigmented ink printing papers use a microporous coating that is obviously open to atmospheric contamination. This is why Charles Berger of UltraStable systems was advocating his thin laminating film for use on paper and canvas. Also, Jon Cone used to spray all his art prints with a proprietary protective spray, to enhance his blacks, and also to seal the coating surface.

If you seal the print behind glass, this type of "yellowing" also seems to be held at bay.

I believe Wilhelm did some testing using Premier spray and found beneficial effects--
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/pip/Premier_WIR_2009_03_03.pdf

John Nollendorfs

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@...> wrote:

>
> I'd hasten to add, I've seen the same thing happen on German Etching, William Turner, Somerset Enhanced (or whatever they call it now), and some cheap Epson matte that was tossed in with the printer. I have no doubt it could show up on other coated matte materials. But they haven't been around long enough for stories to appear.
> The HPR stories abound, quite possibly, because of the popularity of the paper as Mark suggested, but the horror stories out there are worrying and imply higher HPR sensitivity. It's more the batch problems, implying inconsistent starting points, incomparable black points, etc, along with the high contamination potential, that bugs me.
> What if there is initial contamination of the paper maybe from shipping, causing inaccurate initial color data, that then cleans up during testing because of UV? But if I have anything to offer to the comparison samples batch, I'll use it if that's the consensus. Ditto on the Silver Rag suggestion, it's looking good in Mark's initial testing there.
> 
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > On Dec 7, 2009, at 7:54 AM, Mark wrote:
> > 
> > > The severe discoloration problem has been witnessed and reported on  
> > > HPR the most, but that anecdotal experience can be in part if not  
> > > entirely explained by the popularity of this matte paper.
> > 
> > My most dramatic example of this was during the Anthrax scare, when  
> > mail passing through certain mail centers was have certain undisclosed  
> > safety precautions applied to it. I received a fine art matte paper  
> > profiling target print (don't recall if it was HPR, but there was a  
> > lot of HPR being used at that time) from a customer, only to find it  
> > was a surprisingly bright yellow. I requested a replacement target be  
> > FedExed to me, and that one came through the expected white tone. I  
> > believe the process in question may have been intense UV light applied  
> > to kill Anthrax spores, though it could have been a gas of some type.
> > 
> > C. David Tobie
> > Global Product Technology Manager
> > Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> > CDTobie@
> > 
> > 
> >   ----------
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Datacolor
> > www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

John, interesting you'd post right now... do you recall Oce watercolor paper? Same as your old Xtreme Gamut Gelatin Art, Media Street Artist Water ColorPaper 140 lb., and Red River Caspian Art Card?
I believe it was gelatin coated, so not ideal for pigment, but also not bad, just a compromise.. 
I can't find any trace of it out there in the world, but it would be an interesting option these days to give a second shot...
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jrnolly@...> wrote:

>
> ALL pigmented ink printing papers use a microporous coating that is obviously open to atmospheric contamination. This is why Charles Berger of UltraStable systems was advocating his thin laminating film for use on paper and canvas. Also, Jon Cone used to spray all his art prints with a proprietary protective spray, to enhance his blacks, and also to seal the coating surface.
> 
> If you seal the print behind glass, this type of "yellowing" also seems to be held at bay.
> 
> I believe Wilhelm did some testing using Premier spray and found beneficial effects--
> http://www.wilhelm-research.com/pip/Premier_WIR_2009_03_03.pdf
> 
> John Nollendorfs
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@> wrote:
> >
> > I'd hasten to add, I've seen the same thing happen on German Etching, William Turner, Somerset Enhanced (or whatever they call it now), and some cheap Epson matte that was tossed in with the printer. I have no doubt it could show up on other coated matte materials. But they haven't been around long enough for stories to appear.
> > The HPR stories abound, quite possibly, because of the popularity of the paper as Mark suggested, but the horror stories out there are worrying and imply higher HPR sensitivity. It's more the batch problems, implying inconsistent starting points, incomparable black points, etc, along with the high contamination potential, that bugs me.
> > What if there is initial contamination of the paper maybe from shipping, causing inaccurate initial color data, that then cleans up during testing because of UV? But if I have anything to offer to the comparison samples batch, I'll use it if that's the consensus. Ditto on the Silver Rag suggestion, it's looking good in Mark's initial testing there.
> > 
> > Tyler
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > On Dec 7, 2009, at 7:54 AM, Mark wrote:
> > > 
> > > > The severe discoloration problem has been witnessed and reported on  
> > > > HPR the most, but that anecdotal experience can be in part if not  
> > > > entirely explained by the popularity of this matte paper.
> > > 
> > > My most dramatic example of this was during the Anthrax scare, when  
> > > mail passing through certain mail centers was have certain undisclosed  
> > > safety precautions applied to it. I received a fine art matte paper  
> > > profiling target print (don't recall if it was HPR, but there was a  
> > > lot of HPR being used at that time) from a customer, only to find it  
> > > was a surprisingly bright yellow. I requested a replacement target be  
> > > FedExed to me, and that one came through the expected white tone. I  
> > > believe the process in question may have been intense UV light applied  
> > > to kill Anthrax spores, though it could have been a gas of some type.
> > > 
> > > C. David Tobie
> > > Global Product Technology Manager
> > > Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> > > CDTobie@
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   ----------
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Datacolor
> > > www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jrnolly@...> wrote:
>
...
> If you seal the print behind glass, this type of "yellowing" also seems to be held at bay....

one note John, I'm afraid it's happened under glass as well... but I suspect there were adhesives in the frame/matte package that crept into the mix. In two separate circumstances it happened when moisture condensed inside the frame, which accelerates/enables the yellowing.. 

when it dried, the yellow went away..
Fun stuff, good times..
Tyler

Tyler,
Is there a current paper that you would recommend to be considered as the "benchmark"?

--- On Sun, 12/6/09, tboleyyh <tyler@...> wrote:

From: tboleyyh <tyler@...>
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Aardenburg Imaging Fade Tests
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, December 6, 2009, 7:26 PM















 
 



  


    
      
      
      



--- In DigitalBlackandWhit eThePrint@ yahoogroups. com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:



>  ....it's the coating adhesion and coating chemistry interacting with the ink where all the action is!..



This has to be stressed over and over. All you have to do is go through the results, and see the differences between the various high end fine art papers with the same ink sets. Some consistencies take shape, and the major difference has to be brand coating chemistry differences.

Even though it is currently scoring fairly well, but inconsistently, this is one reason I wish HPR was NOT the paper we use to look for inkset performance differences.  As a printer for others, I have had a lot of HPR go though my studio since it's introduction into the market. It is the most problematic paper I have ever worked with in terms of consistency, paper base hue and whiteness, dmax, ink load capability, etc... In addition, the yellowing associated with the visible creation of some sulfur compound in reaction to the coating and certain airborne chemicals seems much more common with HPR than other papers.

This has nothing to do with Mark, he tests what's submitted. Also, I don't mean to disparage the HPR information so far, not at all. It's scoring well with various setups, but it makes me nervous...

It will be interesting to start to see some of the uncoated results start to come in as well.

I hope Aardenberg finds enough support to stay healthy over time, as the more data we have to compare, from more combinations and time, the more useful the database becomes.

I can think of so many combinations to try... 

Tyler





    
     

    
    


 



  











      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I believe they were using bulk irradiation at a facility in Ohio that specialized in handling and testing of very large castings-looking for inclusions or internal cracks. It permitted running mail through by the rail car. The contract was still ongoing not that long ago.

Many materials react to intense X-ray exposure by discoloration.

Regards
Duane

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:

>
> 
> On Dec 7, 2009, at 7:54 AM, Mark wrote:
> 
> > The severe discoloration problem has been witnessed and reported on  
> > HPR the most, but that anecdotal experience can be in part if not  
> > entirely explained by the popularity of this matte paper.
> 
> My most dramatic example of this was during the Anthrax scare, when  
> mail passing through certain mail centers was have certain undisclosed  
> safety precautions applied to it. I received a fine art matte paper  
> profiling target print (don't recall if it was HPR, but there was a  
> lot of HPR being used at that time) from a customer, only to find it  
> was a surprisingly bright yellow. I requested a replacement target be  
> FedExed to me, and that one came through the expected white tone. I  
> believe the process in question may have been intense UV light applied  
> to kill Anthrax spores, though it could have been a gas of some type.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Global Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> CDTobie@...
> 
> 
>   ----------
> 
> 
> 
> Datacolor
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I would have been more comfortable speculating on that before this round of results came out. In the I*Metric color column, there literally no other matte papers but Hahnemuhle in the top 38 or so, none.
So I guess I'd have to stop yapping about it and except HPR as it for the time being.
For my personal work, William Turner is still my favorite, German Etching a close second.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Brubaker family <brubaker_family@...> wrote:

>
> Tyler,
> Is there a current paper that you would recommend to be considered as the "benchmark"?
> 
> --- On Sun, 12/6/09, tboleyyh <tyler@...> wrote:
> 
> From: tboleyyh <tyler@...>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Aardenburg Imaging Fade Tests
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, December 6, 2009, 7:26 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Â 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
>     
>       
>       
>       
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhit eThePrint@ yahoogroups. com, "Mark" <mark@> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> >  ....it's the coating adhesion and coating chemistry interacting with the ink where all the action is!..
> 
> 
> 
> This has to be stressed over and over. All you have to do is go through the results, and see the differences between the various high end fine art papers with the same ink sets. Some consistencies take shape, and the major difference has to be brand coating chemistry differences.
> 
> Even though it is currently scoring fairly well, but inconsistently, this is one reason I wish HPR was NOT the paper we use to look for inkset performance differences.  As a printer for others, I have had a lot of HPR go though my studio since it's introduction into the market. It is the most problematic paper I have ever worked with in terms of consistency, paper base hue and whiteness, dmax, ink load capability, etc... In addition, the yellowing associated with the visible creation of some sulfur compound in reaction to the coating and certain airborne chemicals seems much more common with HPR than other papers.
> 
> This has nothing to do with Mark, he tests what's submitted. Also, I don't mean to disparage the HPR information so far, not at all. It's scoring well with various setups, but it makes me nervous...
> 
> It will be interesting to start to see some of the uncoated results start to come in as well.
> 
> I hope Aardenberg finds enough support to stay healthy over time, as the more data we have to compare, from more combinations and time, the more useful the database becomes.
> 
> I can think of so many combinations to try... 
> 
> Tyler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     
>      
> 
>     
>     
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

This might be a bit OT , but I guess that I'm a bit surprised that it  
seems most everyone is using HPR.  I used to use that paper, but I  
tried Cranes Museo Portfolio Rag a couple of years ago, and to my eye  
(or perhaps my printing style), I found the Crane's to be a bit more  
three dimensional, with excellent blacks, and actually prefer it to HPR.
I'm using the Ultrachrome K3 inkset, but I'm printing both color and  
b&w and sepia, through Imageprint, with great results.
Anyone else happy with that paper?
I did have a few yellowing instances with HPR, that I've never had  
with the Cranes.
David
-- 
David Aschkenas
915 N. Euclid Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA 15206
412-363-3458
www.daschkenasphoto.com

On Dec 7, 2009, at 3:24 PM, Brubaker family wrote:

> Tyler,
> Is there a current paper that you would recommend to be considered  
> as the "benchmark"?
>
> --- On Sun, 12/6/09, tboleyyh <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> From: tboleyyh <tyler@...>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Aardenburg Imaging Fade Tests
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, December 6, 2009, 7:26 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhit eThePrint@ yahoogroups. com, "Mark"  
> <mark@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>>  ....it's the coating adhesion and coating chemistry interacting  
>> with the ink where all the action is!..
>
>
>
> This has to be stressed over and over. All you have to do is go  
> through the results, and see the differences between the various  
> high end fine art papers with the same ink sets. Some consistencies  
> take shape, and the major difference has to be brand coating  
> chemistry differences.
>
> Even though it is currently scoring fairly well, but  
> inconsistently, this is one reason I wish HPR was NOT the paper we  
> use to look for inkset performance differences.  As a printer for  
> others, I have had a lot of HPR go though my studio since it's  
> introduction into the market. It is the most problematic paper I  
> have ever worked with in terms of consistency, paper base hue and  
> whiteness, dmax, ink load capability, etc... In addition, the  
> yellowing associated with the visible creation of some sulfur  
> compound in reaction to the coating and certain airborne chemicals  
> seems much more common with HPR than other papers.
>
> This has nothing to do with Mark, he tests what's submitted. Also,  
> I don't mean to disparage the HPR information so far, not at all.  
> It's scoring well with various setups, but it makes me nervous...
>
> It will be interesting to start to see some of the uncoated results  
> start to come in as well.
>
> I hope Aardenberg finds enough support to stay healthy over time,  
> as the more data we have to compare, from more combinations and  
> time, the more useful the database becomes.
>
> I can think of so many combinations to try...
>
> Tyler
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you  
> wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by  
> visiting this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules  
> and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the  
> group Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines”  
> in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “ 
> OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,  
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER  
> INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL  
> BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF  
> SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE  
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO  
> OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR  
> CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO  
> GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Well Portfolo Rag is a very nice paper. I just saw where William Christenbery has produced a lot of his old famous work with K3 on it. 
One 8x10 of one of his most popular images is selling for $20 grand each.

But Port Rag is never going to achieve the universal results of Photorag because it is too warm. I just had a painter tell me to please not use it again because it is "dull" in comparison to PRag.

Look if there is a coating issue with Photorag I'll bet anything the same issue will be attached to William Turner, Museum and German Etching, etc. I bet it is the same coating on all,or very similar.

The one thing that made me  rest a little about Photorag was the >240 year for color rating the Wilhelm gave the HP version with Vivera inks. But I don't trust even that test anymore.

john

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, David Aschkenas <Daschkenas@...> wrote:
>
> This might be a bit OT , but I guess that I'm a bit surprised that it  
> seems most everyone is using HPR.  I used to use that paper, but I  
> tried Cranes Museo Portfolio Rag a couple of years ago, and to my eye  
> (or perhaps my printing style), I found the Crane's to be a bit more  
> three dimensional, with excellent blacks, and actually prefer it to HPR.
> I'm using the Ultrachrome K3 inkset, but I'm printing both color and  
> b&w and sepia, through Imageprint, with great results.
> Anyone else happy with that paper?

I really like Portfolio Rag, too, but with my Canon Lucia inks, it doesn't perform as well as HPR in terms of light fastness. However, with an Epson 7800/k3 ink setup, the lightfastness doesn't take the hit on Portfolio Rag that Lucia inks do according to my testing in comparison to HPR. That's the value proposition in testing specific product combinations , ie., printer/ driver/ink/paper/coating parameters.  In the final analysis, your personal aesthetic choice of papers may still trump any reductions in longevity that a particular product combination might pose, but a wise choice is usually an informed choice.

In the round robin testing I was suggesting earlier, we could include more than one benchmark paper. Canson infinity Rag photographique, Museo Portfolio Rag, HPR, Premier Art Smooth Fine Art, and no doubt  several others are all similar in aesthetic properties, ie., for the most part without "bright white" OBA appearance and similar weight and texture. One goal of a paired comparison test is simply to better isolate any other variables Hence, the test samples should be run as one batch in testing.  I've got up to 25 sample capacity that can be tested as a single batch in one of my light fade units, so there is room for more than just one "benchmark" paper type.

regards,
Mark
http:/www.aardenburg-imaging.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

> In the round robin testing I was suggesting earlier, we could include more than one benchmark paper. Canson infinity Rag photographique, Museo Portfolio Rag, HPR, Premier Art Smooth Fine Art, and no doubt  several others are all similar in aesthetic properties, ie., for the most part without "bright white" OBA appearance and similar weight and texture. 

Not to overstate my support, but am very happy to see PremierArt Fine Art among your candidates. It's my understanding that this paper is essentially the same as Epson's PremierArt Scrapbook paper... which Epson claims is their most archival paper. 

Forgot to mention this in my off-forum e-mail with you. Just adding that here in this forum, thinking it might be useful information for other readers of this very active thread. Thus, in spite of the rather prosaic sounding label of "Scrapbook" it's a paper worth taking notice of.

Paul W.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

> Not to overstate my support, but am very happy to see PremierArt Fine Art among your candidates. It's my understanding that this paper is essentially the same as Epson's PremierArt Scrapbook paper... which Epson claims is their most archival paper. 
> 
> Forgot to mention this in my off-forum e-mail with you. Just adding that here in this forum, thinking it might be useful information for other readers of this very active thread. Thus, in spite of the rather prosaic sounding label of "Scrapbook" it's a paper worth taking notice of.
> 
> Paul W.
>

Yes, I recently purchased a package of it it to test for my own personal use. I was looking for a double sided paper, and this paper gets high praise from many printmakers plus it is very reasonably priced.

cheers,
Mark

That sounds perfect Mark. I will contribute some samples and a payment toward that. 
If we could do them all at the same time, with the same inksets then we'll really know a lot more. THEN I hope the paper manufactures and the 3rd party ink companies  will start using you regularly and contributing some support, like they should have a long time ago.

John

> In the round robin testing I was suggesting earlier, we could include more than one benchmark paper. Canson infinity Rag photographique, Museo Portfolio Rag, HPR, Premier Art Smooth Fine Art, and no doubt  several others are all similar in aesthetic properties, ie., for the most part without "bright white" OBA appearance and similar weight and texture. One goal of a paired comparison test is simply to better isolate any other variables Hence, the test samples should be run as one batch in testing.  I've got up to 25 sample capacity that can be tested as a single batch in one of my light fade units, so there is room for more than just one "benchmark" paper type.
> 
> regards,
> Mark
> http:/www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>

Isn't Premier Art the company that Wilhelm had some influence on in the development of their products early on?

j

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> 
> > Not to overstate my support, but am very happy to see PremierArt Fine Art among your candidates. It's my understanding that this paper is essentially the same as Epson's PremierArt Scrapbook paper... which Epson claims is their most archival paper. 
> > 
> > Forgot to mention this in my off-forum e-mail with you. Just adding that here in this forum, thinking it might be useful information for other readers of this very active thread. Thus, in spite of the rather prosaic sounding label of "Scrapbook" it's a paper worth taking notice of.
> > 
> > Paul W.
> >
> 
> Yes, I recently purchased a package of it it to test for my own personal use. I was looking for a double sided paper, and this paper gets high praise from many printmakers plus it is very reasonably priced.
> 
> cheers,
> Mark
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:
>
> Isn't Premier Art the company that Wilhelm had some influence on in the development of their products early on?

My friend Henry has probably influenced all of these companies in one good way or another!  We all owe Henry much thanks for pressing the print longevity cause for the last few decades.

regards,

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Sorry, John, I really don't know. I do know that Henry Wilhelm advertised an archival printer washer (for the darkroom!) back in the 70's in the Whole Photography Catalog! I still have my copy of that publication, btw. So evidently he's had a long history of concern for archival issues.

Boy, I'm dating myself!


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:

>
> Isn't Premier Art the company that Wilhelm had some influence on in the development of their products early on?
> 
> j
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> > 
> > > Not to overstate my support, but am very happy to see PremierArt Fine Art among your candidates. It's my understanding that this paper is essentially the same as Epson's PremierArt Scrapbook paper... which Epson claims is their most archival paper. 
> > > 
> > > Forgot to mention this in my off-forum e-mail with you. Just adding that here in this forum, thinking it might be useful information for other readers of this very active thread. Thus, in spite of the rather prosaic sounding label of "Scrapbook" it's a paper worth taking notice of.
> > > 
> > > Paul W.
> > >
> > 
> > Yes, I recently purchased a package of it it to test for my own personal use. I was looking for a double sided paper, and this paper gets high praise from many printmakers plus it is very reasonably priced.
> > 
> > cheers,
> > Mark
> >
>

You hippie. I bet you and Henry wore Earth Shoes too and grew your own herbs.

There is a funny bio video on the Luminous Landscape site with Wilhelm where he discuses how he got started selling those archival print washers out of his house where he put them together. The police in Grinell Iowa hauled him off to jail for running a business out of his home. He took it to court finally and won, citing the evidence that if people could give music lessons out of their homes he should be able to make and sell print washers. So he won and kept selling them.

We think of him as establishment now, but in his early days he was a rebel, and willing to go to jail for print washers :- )). 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> Sorry, John, I really don't know. I do know that Henry Wilhelm advertised an archival printer washer (for the darkroom!) back in the 70's in the Whole Photography Catalog! I still have my copy of that publication, btw. So evidently he's had a long history of concern for archival issues.
> 
> Boy, I'm dating myself!
> 
>

"john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:
>
> Isn't Premier Art the company that Wilhelm had some influence on in the development of their products early on?

There was some connection, but I'm not sure what it was or is.

Premier Imaging also has another arm that was called Photo Warehouse (now http://store.ultrafineonline.com/) and was into wet darkroom photography for a long time.  I have a feeling the connection to Wilhelm goes back to the old darkroom days.  UltraFine is now Premier Imaging's retail arm and is where people can still find the Brightcube Eclipse papers, among other things.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Yes... I know a part of that story. I ordered one of those washers, it didn't arrive for a long time, then I heard he'd gone bankrupt and could file a claim to get my money back. Never got the money but years later, on a CompuServe forum (dating myself again!) I mentioned this incident. Lo and behold, Henry was a member of that thread and offered to send me a free copy of his book, and did so! I thought it was very decent of him, I have no hard feelings.

And - as a matter of fact, I did have Earth Shoes! Horribly uncomfortable, got rid of 'em. No herbs though... but my wife does that to this day! And I do have a ponytail :)

Paul W.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:

>
> You hippie. I bet you and Henry wore Earth Shoes too and grew your own herbs.
> 
> There is a funny bio video on the Luminous Landscape site with Wilhelm where he discuses how he got started selling those archival print washers out of his house where he put them together. The police in Grinell Iowa hauled him off to jail for running a business out of his home. He took it to court finally and won, citing the evidence that if people could give music lessons out of their homes he should be able to make and sell print washers. So he won and kept selling them.
> 
> We think of him as establishment now, but in his early days he was a rebel, and willing to go to jail for print washers :- )). 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Sorry, John, I really don't know. I do know that Henry Wilhelm advertised an archival printer washer (for the darkroom!) back in the 70's in the Whole Photography Catalog! I still have my copy of that publication, btw. So evidently he's had a long history of concern for archival issues.
> > 
> > Boy, I'm dating myself!
> > 
> >
>

A bit of added history for this thread. Here I have a copy of "Procedures for Processing and Storing Black and White Photographs For Maximum Possible Permanence"  published by East Street Gallery, Grinnell, Iowa.  "Copyright 1969 and revision 1970 by Henry Wilhelm for East Street Gallery."
 Some 48 pages on newsprint (now very seriously yellowed) it was available for 50 cents.

Two quotes from the last page:
"Visitors are welcome – but if you think you want to crash (stay overnight) please check with us in advance."
"The East Street Gallery is a cooperative community located in Grinnell, Iowa.  Photography, publishing, and the making of photographic equipment provide the economic base of the community."

And, yes, I wore Earthshoes.
Jim
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> Yes... I know a part of that story. I ordered one of those washers, it didn't arrive for a long time, then I heard he'd gone bankrupt and could file a claim to get my money back. Never got the money but years later, on a CompuServe forum (dating myself again!) I mentioned this incident. Lo and behold, Henry was a member of that thread and offered to send me a free copy of his book, and did so! I thought it was very decent of him, I have no hard feelings.
> 
> And - as a matter of fact, I did have Earth Shoes! Horribly uncomfortable, got rid of 'em. No herbs though... but my wife does that to this day! And I do have a ponytail :)
> 
> Paul W.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> >
> > You hippie. I bet you and Henry wore Earth Shoes too and grew your own herbs.
> > 
> > There is a funny bio video on the Luminous Landscape site with Wilhelm where he discuses how he got started selling those archival print washers out of his house where he put them together. The police in Grinell Iowa hauled him off to jail for running a business out of his home. He took it to court finally and won, citing the evidence that if people could give music lessons out of their homes he should be able to make and sell print washers. So he won and kept selling them.
> > 
> > We think of him as establishment now, but in his early days he was a rebel, and willing to go to jail for print washers :- )). 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Sorry, John, I really don't know. I do know that Henry Wilhelm advertised an archival printer washer (for the darkroom!) back in the 70's in the Whole Photography Catalog! I still have my copy of that publication, btw. So evidently he's had a long history of concern for archival issues.
> > > 
> > > Boy, I'm dating myself!
> > > 
> > >
> >
>

Sounds like a damn commie commune in the middle of the corn belt. I wonder what they were smokin when they were making those east street washers.



j

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jlkrysan" <jkrysan@...> wrote:

>
> A bit of added history for this thread. Here I have a copy of "Procedures for Processing and Storing Black and White Photographs For Maximum Possible Permanence"  published by East Street Gallery, Grinnell, Iowa.  "Copyright 1969 and revision 1970 by Henry Wilhelm for East Street Gallery."
>  Some 48 pages on newsprint (now very seriously yellowed) it was available for 50 cents.
> 
> Two quotes from the last page:
> "Visitors are welcome – but if you think you want to crash (stay overnight) please check with us in advance."
> "The East Street Gallery is a cooperative community located in Grinnell, Iowa.  Photography, publishing, and the making of photographic equipment provide the economic base of the community."
> 
> And, yes, I wore Earthshoes.
> Jim
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Yes... I know a part of that story. I ordered one of those washers, it didn't arrive for a long time, then I heard he'd gone bankrupt and could file a claim to get my money back. Never got the money but years later, on a CompuServe forum (dating myself again!) I mentioned this incident. Lo and behold, Henry was a member of that thread and offered to send me a free copy of his book, and did so! I thought it was very decent of him, I have no hard feelings.
> > 
> > And - as a matter of fact, I did have Earth Shoes! Horribly uncomfortable, got rid of 'em. No herbs though... but my wife does that to this day! And I do have a ponytail :)
> > 
> > Paul W.
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> > >
> > > You hippie. I bet you and Henry wore Earth Shoes too and grew your own herbs.
> > > 
> > > There is a funny bio video on the Luminous Landscape site with Wilhelm where he discuses how he got started selling those archival print washers out of his house where he put them together. The police in Grinell Iowa hauled him off to jail for running a business out of his home. He took it to court finally and won, citing the evidence that if people could give music lessons out of their homes he should be able to make and sell print washers. So he won and kept selling them.
> > > 
> > > We think of him as establishment now, but in his early days he was a rebel, and willing to go to jail for print washers :- )). 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry, John, I really don't know. I do know that Henry Wilhelm advertised an archival printer washer (for the darkroom!) back in the 70's in the Whole Photography Catalog! I still have my copy of that publication, btw. So evidently he's had a long history of concern for archival issues.
> > > > 
> > > > Boy, I'm dating myself!
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

I had a pair of Earthshoes.


Man, they really hurt.




Bill Kennedy

-----Original Message-----
From: john <deanwork2003@...>
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, Dec 8, 2009 6:27 pm
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Aardenburg Imaging Fade Tests-Premier Fine Art Paper


  
    
                  
Sounds like a damn commie commune in the middle of the corn belt. I wonder what they were smokin when they were making those east street washers.

j

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "jlkrysan" <jkrysan@...> wrote:
>
> A bit of added history for this thread. Here I have a copy of "Procedures for Processing and Storing Black and White Photographs For Maximum Possible Permanence"  published by East Street Gallery, Grinnell, Iowa.  "Copyright 1969 and revision 1970 by Henry Wilhelm for East Street Gallery."
>  Some 48 pages on newsprint (now very seriously yellowed) it was available for 50 cents.
> 
> Two quotes from the last page:
> "Visitors are welcome – but if you think you want to crash (stay overnight) please check with us in advance."
> "The East Street Gallery is a cooperative community located in Grinnell, Iowa.  Photography, publishing, and the making of photographic equipment provide the economic base of the community."
> 
> And, yes, I wore Earthshoes.
> Jim
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Yes... I know a part of that story. I ordered one of those washers, it didn't arrive for a long time, then I heard he'd gone bankrupt and could file a claim to get my money back. Never got the money but years later, on a CompuServe forum (dating myself again!) I mentioned this incident. Lo and behold, Henry was a member of that thread and offered to send me a free copy of his book, and did so! I thought it was very decent of him, I have no hard feelings.
> > 
> > And - as a matter of fact, I did have Earth Shoes! Horribly uncomfortable, got rid of 'em. No herbs though... but my wife does that to this day! And I do have a ponytail :)
> > 
> > Paul W.
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> > >
> > > You hippie. I bet you and Henry wore Earth Shoes too and grew your own herbs.
> > > 
> > > There is a funny bio video on the Luminous Landscape site with Wilhelm where he discuses how he got started selling those archival print washers out of his house where he put them together. The police in Grinell Iowa hauled him off to jail for running a business out of his home. He took it to court finally and won, citing the evidence that if people could give music lessons out of their homes he should be able to make and sell print washers. So he won and kept selling them.
> > > 
> > > We think of him as establishment now, but in his early days he was a rebel, and willing to go to jail for print washers :- )). 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry, John, I really don't know. I do know that Henry Wilhelm advertised an archival printer washer (for the darkroom!) back in the 70's in the Whole Photography Catalog! I still have my copy of that publication, btw. So evidently he's had a long history of concern for archival issues.
> > > > 
> > > > Boy, I'm dating myself!
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


    
             

  
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ease us guys.  I'm still wearing Burks 24/7.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Anybody have any comments about why Velvet Fine Art is getting twice the longevity rating for K3 ABW on WR than all the other rag papers? It's weird, and it shows no improvement with adding a uv coating like the others.

john

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Fielder" <tfielder@...> wrote:

>
> Ease us guys.  I'm still wearing Burks 24/7.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:
>
> Anybody have any comments about why Velvet Fine Art is getting twice the longevity rating for K3 ABW on WR than all the other rag papers? It's weird, and it shows no improvement with adding a uv coating like the others.
> 


I'm not seeing this.  What WIR documents are you looking at? I looked at the PDF report for the Epson 3800.

regards,

Mark

HPR, Bamboo, and Ultrasmooth Fine Art are doing better than it so far on Mark's site on a 7800, OEM. So pick your poison, Mark's procedures strike me as more demanding, informative and reliable...
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:

>
> Anybody have any comments about why Velvet Fine Art is getting twice the longevity rating for K3 ABW on WR than all the other rag papers? It's weird, and it shows no improvement with adding a uv coating like the others.
> 
> john
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Fielder" <tfielder@> wrote:
> >
> > Ease us guys.  I'm still wearing Burks 24/7.
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Well Mark,

This is really friggin interesting look at the disparity of figures for Velvet Fine Art behind glass ( and others) with ABW between the 9880 and 9800, 9900 inksets. I never noticed that.

Actually though the 9800 figures still say Preliminary, while the newer inksets don't. So, he upped the stability for K3 BW on the last two inksets. They either changed their grays or he just wasn't finished with the tests on the 9800. Confusing. He should have updated it.


He is saying >406 WR years for the 7880/9880 http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/9880.html

and > 115 WR years for the same paper on the 7800/9800 - http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/9800.html

And >406 WR years on the 7900/9900 - http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/7900.html

 The new Epson inksets are quadrupling bw stability while the color figures are the same?

john




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> >
> > Anybody have any comments about why Velvet Fine Art is getting twice the longevity rating for K3 ABW on WR than all the other rag papers? It's weird, and it shows no improvement with adding a uv coating like the others.
> > 
> 
> 
> I'm not seeing this.  What WIR documents are you looking at? I looked at the PDF report for the Epson 3800.
> 
> regards,
> 
> Mark
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:

> He is saying >406 WR years for the 7880/9880 http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/9880.html
> 
> and > 115 WR years for the same paper on the 7800/9800 - http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/9800.html
> 
> And >406 WR years on the 7900/9900 - http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/7900.html
> 
>  The new Epson inksets are quadrupling bw stability while the color figures are the same?
> 
> john
> 

My guess is that it is just an unintended clerical oversight, and that all three systems should have been posted with the same ABW score. Also, WIR uses a ">" symbol to mean that no endpoint has yet been reached, but the client wants the consumer to know that the test has proceeded far enough to prove the product is as least as good as the preliminary rating figure cited.  The downside of this effort is merely that one shouldn't "finalize" one's opinions of the comparative performance of different products until the testing is fully completed.  AaI&A uses a similar procedure for reporting AaI& conservation Display ratings. A "+" sign in the AaI&A rating means a lower limit boundary has been reached but the upper limit boundary still requires more exposure, and the test is therefore still ongoing. When no value is listed in the AaI&A database column for the Conservation Display rating it means that no limits have been reached. Tests are also ongoing.

 It's pretty clear to me from the precisely identical scores that the WIR display life ratings for the newer 7880/9880 (K3VM inks) and 7900/9900 (HDR inks) systems are repurposed test results from the original tests that were run on the 7800/9800 (K3 inks) systems.  I base my conclusion on the fact that no image permanence tests (not mine or anyone else's) are totally precise. There will always be some experimental variability when testing different samples even from the same batch of materials.  That said,  such repurposing of the test results would arguably be justified by Epson and WIR if the original tests ended on a limit factor that is common to all three ink sets, and if Epson and WIR believe the new ink sets still have that same limiting factor.  WIR does not list what criterion became the failure mode in its test reports, but K3, K3VM, and HDR share yellow, cyan, and the photo gray inks in common. My guess would be the pure yellow loss criterion at the 0.6 density level in the WIR target set is what is causing the failure in the color tests, and probably a color imbalance of the neutral patches in the ABW mode (the only patches that would be tested in the B&W testing). Hence, the three ink sets should receive ostensibly the same score in the WIR testing protocol based on this common limiting factor. It is less likely that we will see identical performance in the AaI&A tests, because the new vivid magenta, orange, and green inks should have at least some influence on the upper limit boundary of the AaI&A conservation display ratings.

Two other points worth noting.  First, "LImiting factors"  are a commonly devised way of designing product performance testing specifications, not only in image permanence testing but in other types of product testing as well.  One of the aspects of print permanence testing that I recognized only recently when developing the AaI&A conservation display ratings, is that a "limiting factor" in performance does not tell the whole story. We need to report a range (in an analogous way that EPA fuel efficiency ratings present both city and highway scores). Some images will show changes at the limiting factor because they have a lot of image area that possess the limiting colors or tones, but other images will have little or none of that limiting color or tone so they  will show less fading until a more generalized level of fade enters the picture.  Hence, the AaI&A conservation display ratings score a range rather than a single value and that range is based on the performance of the worst 10% of the test colors versus the average performance over the whole color set.  Second, please note that the AaI&A conservation display ratings evaluate the exposure dose tolerated by the product for "little or no noticeable" fade which is thus an assessment of "early stage" fading, whereas WIR uses a consumer-oriented criteria set geared towards "easily noticeable" fade and thus report more advanced levels of fade.  Both early stage fading and later stage fading are important because many systems show non linear fading performance.  A product can do well early on and then fade more rapidly later on, and vice versa.  Although AaI&A doesn't have a "consumer display rating" for easily noticeable fade at this time, the AaI&A tests are continued well past the conservation display rated exposure so that members can see for themselves the full nature of the fading as the products become more severely faded. 


regards,

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

> "john" <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> 
> > [WIR] is saying >406 WR years for the 7880/9880 
> > http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/9880.html
> > 
> > and >115 WR years for the same paper on the 7800/9800 
> > http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/9800.html ...
> > 

"Mark" <mark@...> wrote:
 
> My guess is that it is just an unintended clerical oversight,
> and that all three systems should have been posted with the 
> same ABW score.

I looked at some of the AaI&A results to see if the Vivid magenta was so much more lightfast that it would make a difference in the ABW results.  I saw no indication, however, that the new magenta is more lightfast.  

The relative weakness of the magenta compared to the cyan is often, if not usually, the weak point in what I call "blended" (carbon + color) B&W inksets.  When it fades faster than the cyan, the blended inkset prints tend to turn greenish.  Note that the dedicated B&W inksets usually do not add yellow, which is also weak.  

(I did add yellow in the original FSN to counterbalance the warm shift -- for a while.  But I decided to drop that effort when the pigments improved with the next generation.)

Epson's M is, in fact, very good relative to most I've used or tested.  I switched to it some years ago for my personal printing with blended inksets.  See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/4K+.pdf  I urged MIS to use Espon M in a premium B&W blended insket, but I was unsuccessful in convincing them.

> ...

> 
> ... WIR does not list what criterion became the failure mode 
> in its test reports, ...

WIR reports are sadly lacking compared to the AaI&A reports and what is needed by serious people.  I started doing my own testing because there was, at the time, simply no information that was good enough to actually design superior inksets.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:

> I looked at some of the AaI&A results to see if the Vivid magenta was so much more lightfast that it would make a difference in the ABW results.  I saw no indication, however, that the new magenta is more lightfast.  


The K3VM and HDR inksets got started more recently at AaI&A and haven't racked up enough exposure time yet for me to conclude I'm seeing any differences, either.  And I suspect where the differences will really manifest is in color printing, not so much the ABW mode although AaI&A test reports document any measurable color shifts along the way. 

One interesting fact that I forgot to mention earlier is that with a more liberal consumer fade tolerance, the ABW mode may not be blending enough magenta into the print for it ever to trigger the hue shift (color imbalance) criterion in the WIR set. With total drop out of the magenta, the green shift may still be within "acceptable" tolerance in the WIR criteria set, because after all, the set was developed with traditional color prints in mind.  In which case. the next criterion is a 25% density loss in the 0.6 or 1.0 neutral patch.  That's a considerable amount of fade, and a likely reason we see the "greater than" sign (">") still in effect even at the 406 display year rating.  It takes a whopping 800 megalux hours of exposure to get out to 400 WIR years, and even at accelerated test conditions that's a very long time in test. Due to the time needed to clock that kind of light exposure dose in test, it would seem that all of the scores are being based on performance of the original ABW K3 tests.

mark
http:/www.aardenburg-imaging.

Mark,
  
  I have abandoned inkjet coated papers long ago and only use now uncoated, fine art paper for my limited edition prints.

Although Arches watercolor get very high Dmax with my ink (1.55.1.58), it is not the paper I like the most. It is heavily sized and the Hot Press samples I have tested have a surface that it is too smooth for my tastes.
Rather, my research is restricted to etching and printmaking papers: less sized and very beautiful surface. After all inkjet printing is, indeed, a printing process rather than a watercolor process.

At present, I standardized on two papers:
1) Hot Press Pescia, 100% cotton. It has quite a low Dmax of its own (about 1.45-1.49), but Dmax goes past 2.0 with the Carbon-gelatin process I apply afterward (see, for example, http://www.mantinieri.com/techniques.html ).

2) For prints that are not coated, the uncoated paper I liked the most is the Pescia Velata for Editions. It is a special paper for limited editions books and portfolios. The Dmax (with no coating nor spraying of any kind is at least 1.59). Its look is superior (IMHO) to Arches. Unfortunately it is 100% Cellulose and I do not know if it can be considered archival. Older "archival" silver prints where also made on 100% Cellulose.

While still researching for a 100% cotton uncoated paper to use without the Carbon-gelatin process, I wonder if I can submit for imaging fade test two samples with the technique described above.
Namely, a Pesci HP with Carbon-gelatine process and un uncoated, Pescia Velata for Editions).

Thank you very much.

  Mantinieri

http://www.mantinieri.com



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:

>
> There are some new results on in the Aardenburg Imaging fade tests relating to the materials we use.  
> See http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/
> 
> To see the latest full results you should pony up the fees so that we can keep this resource going.
> 
> Among other results, the 20 MLux Hours results for the 1800 Eboni 3-MK are there.  Also in the set of test results are Epson ABW, HP, PiezoTone Selenium and Sepia, as well as K6 neutral.
> 
> I must confess I was a little disappointed.  The H. Photo Rag tone shift stopped the 3MK from getting an I* rating of 100 for every patch (no other inkset did either).  However, if the paper white and the next lightest patch are excluded, all the rest got the top rating.  Surprisingly, not all the PhotoRag showed this same tone shift.  Samples of the paper clearly vary (or others were smart enough to lay their paper in the sun for a while before printing it).
> 
> If we look just at the 50% patch, so that we have a fair comparison that would include the HP Z3100 inkset and a PiezoTone selenium (where Portfolio K was used -- not a fair comparison to full pigment), the results are consistent with my view that 100% carbon is a very valid approach.  The Cone carbon Sepia and Eboni 3MK had the lowest delta E's of the group.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mantinieri" <mantinieri@...> wrote:

> While still researching for a 100% cotton uncoated paper to use without the Carbon-gelatin process, I wonder if I can submit for imaging fade test two samples with the technique described above.
> Namely, a Pesci HP with Carbon-gelatine process and un uncoated, Pescia Velata for Editions).


I try hard to accommodate any printing process AaI&A members wish to submit, but regrettably I have to draw the line on proprietary methods and/or prints embellished by the artist's unique methods because these results would be of little extensible value to other AaI&A members.  A pooled membership funding concept is presently being used by AaI&A to financially support the testing, so the AaI&A database has to stay largely on track with mainstream materials even though it's always interesting to test a few more unique processes thrown in for good measure. 

You describe your coating method as a "gelatine proprietary emulsion" on your website, so unless it is for sale as a commercially available product that others could purchase it would need to be tested under private contract and not as part of the membership participation.  The uncoated sample sounds appropriate to test if you are using commercially available inks. That said, and given that other AaI&A members have already walked up pretty hard against the "proprietary methods" boundary line already, I'd probably be inclined to bend the rules a bit for you as well.

I'm proud of what AaI&A has managed to achieve in year 2009.  One important contribution was the development of a specific monochrome I* metric test method that enables much more comprehensive testing of monochrome printing processes than any other testing laboratory presently undertakes. There are now about a dozen unique B&W print samples in test with more on the way soon.  The Digital BW forum readers have been more supportive of the AaI&A digital print research program than just about any other group yet the AaI&A membership ranks are still a tiny fraction of what is needed to deal with the wide variety of BW inkjet processes available today let alone all the color processes. My sample testing is still outpacing the AaI&A membership funding by a very large factor. I've got to figure out a solution to that problem soon.  


kind regards,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Mantinieri,

Sounds interesting, but I would certainly have these tested thoroughly before making any major claims about papers without receptor coating being that much superior to the the rag papers with receptor coating with the inks we have today. Possibly, but does anyone know for sure?

In describing the concept of Carbon inkjet formulas, you are not dealing with the same compounds that one sees in ancient graphite drawings for instance. :-). I've heard than analogy before :- ), applied to carbonized monochrome inks that did pretty badly in accelerated tests. I've heard so many bogus claims that I'm suspicious of any of them anymore.

What we are dealing with in the digital inkjet printmaking world is VERY finely ground  carbon substances that do not perform the same way a graphite pencil drawing would. I"ve used that analogy myself and I'm afraid it was just wrong.  ( I just saw a few carbon ink drawings by Leonardo done about 1500 last week and to me they looked perfect, other than the paper yellowing some. The color and density looked great. 

For some things a dmax of 1.58 might be sufficient, but for most of what I do I'm so used to 1.68-1.78 (HP) that to go down that far would make my clients scream "flat".

But even so, I would love to see how this system you are using is testing. I don't think the inkjet paper formulations are perfected yet either. Personally I don't think it is only the media that is causing a lot of these uneven results with monochrome prints, but a lot of it is the nature of the inks themselves. You can see wide variety of the same papers with different inks testing very differently, and vice versa. Mark can comment more intelligently. 

John


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mantinieri" <mantinieri@...> wrote:

>
> Mark,
>   
>   I have abandoned inkjet coated papers long ago and only use now uncoated, fine art paper for my limited edition prints.
> 
> Although Arches watercolor get very high Dmax with my ink (1.55.1.58), it is not the paper I like the most. It is heavily sized and the Hot Press samples I have tested have a surface that it is too smooth for my tastes.
> Rather, my research is restricted to etching and printmaking papers: less sized and very beautiful surface. After all inkjet printing is, indeed, a printing process rather than a watercolor process.
> 
> At present, I standardized on two papers:
> 1) Hot Press Pescia, 100% cotton. It has quite a low Dmax of its own (about 1.45-1.49), but Dmax goes past 2.0 with the Carbon-gelatin process I apply afterward (see, for example, http://www.mantinieri.com/techniques.html ).
> 
> 2) For prints that are not coated, the uncoated paper I liked the most is the Pescia Velata for Editions. It is a special paper for limited editions books and portfolios. The Dmax (with no coating nor spraying of any kind is at least 1.59). Its look is superior (IMHO) to Arches. Unfortunately it is 100% Cellulose and I do not know if it can be considered archival. Older "archival" silver prints where also made on 100% Cellulose.
> 
> While still researching for a 100% cotton uncoated paper to use without the Carbon-gelatin process, I wonder if I can submit for imaging fade test two samples with the technique described above.
> Namely, a Pesci HP with Carbon-gelatine process and un uncoated, Pescia Velata for Editions).
> 
> Thank you very much.
> 
>   Mantinieri
> 
> http://www.mantinieri.com
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@> wrote:
> >
> > There are some new results on in the Aardenburg Imaging fade tests relating to the materials we use.  
> > See http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/
> > 
> > To see the latest full results you should pony up the fees so that we can keep this resource going.
> > 
> > Among other results, the 20 MLux Hours results for the 1800 Eboni 3-MK are there.  Also in the set of test results are Epson ABW, HP, PiezoTone Selenium and Sepia, as well as K6 neutral.
> > 
> > I must confess I was a little disappointed.  The H. Photo Rag tone shift stopped the 3MK from getting an I* rating of 100 for every patch (no other inkset did either).  However, if the paper white and the next lightest patch are excluded, all the rest got the top rating.  Surprisingly, not all the PhotoRag showed this same tone shift.  Samples of the paper clearly vary (or others were smart enough to lay their paper in the sun for a while before printing it).
> > 
> > If we look just at the 50% patch, so that we have a fair comparison that would include the HP Z3100 inkset and a PiezoTone selenium (where Portfolio K was used -- not a fair comparison to full pigment), the results are consistent with my view that 100% carbon is a very valid approach.  The Cone carbon Sepia and Eboni 3MK had the lowest delta E's of the group.
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
>

Mark,

I hope you are printing out all these emails and posts and saving them so you can eventually use them for submitting for a grant. You need a big science grant.

john

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mantinieri" <mantinieri@> wrote:
> 
> > While still researching for a 100% cotton uncoated paper to use without the Carbon-gelatin process, I wonder if I can submit for imaging fade test two samples with the technique described above.
> > Namely, a Pesci HP with Carbon-gelatine process and un uncoated, Pescia Velata for Editions).
> 
> 
> I try hard to accommodate any printing process AaI&A members wish to submit, but regrettably I have to draw the line on proprietary methods and/or prints embellished by the artist's unique methods because these results would be of little extensible value to other AaI&A members.  A pooled membership funding concept is presently being used by AaI&A to financially support the testing, so the AaI&A database has to stay largely on track with mainstream materials even though it's always interesting to test a few more unique processes thrown in for good measure. 
> 
> You describe your coating method as a "gelatine proprietary emulsion" on your website, so unless it is for sale as a commercially available product that others could purchase it would need to be tested under private contract and not as part of the membership participation.  The uncoated sample sounds appropriate to test if you are using commercially available inks. That said, and given that other AaI&A members have already walked up pretty hard against the "proprietary methods" boundary line already, I'd probably be inclined to bend the rules a bit for you as well.
> 
> I'm proud of what AaI&A has managed to achieve in year 2009.  One important contribution was the development of a specific monochrome I* metric test method that enables much more comprehensive testing of monochrome printing processes than any other testing laboratory presently undertakes. There are now about a dozen unique B&W print samples in test with more on the way soon.  The Digital BW forum readers have been more supportive of the AaI&A digital print research program than just about any other group yet the AaI&A membership ranks are still a tiny fraction of what is needed to deal with the wide variety of BW inkjet processes available today let alone all the color processes. My sample testing is still outpacing the AaI&A membership funding by a very large factor. I've got to figure out a solution to that problem soon.  
> 
> 
> kind regards,
> Mark
> http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>

Don't we all :)

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Dec 12, 2009, at 11:02 AM, john wrote:

> Mark,
>
> I hope you are printing out all these emails and posts and saving  
> them so you can eventually use them for submitting for a grant. You  
> need a big science grant.
>
> john
>

Hi

What substrates do people recommend for printing high quality,  
waterproof transparencies or even digital negatives?

Cheers

Steve

Pictorico Ultra OHP

Mark Nelson
www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
PDNPRint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com

sent from my iPhonetypeDeviceThingy

On Jan 5, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:

>
> Hi
>
> What substrates do people recommend for printing high quality,
> waterproof transparencies or even digital negatives?
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks. I am hoping for something thinner. The Pictorico product,  
besides not being available in the UK, is 145 microns whereas I am  
hoping to get c100 microns.



On 5 Jan 2010, at 23:54, Mark Nelson <Ender100@...> wrote:

> Pictorico Ultra OHP
>
> Mark Nelson
> www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
> PDNPRint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
> www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com
>
> sent from my iPhonetypeDeviceThingy
>
> On Jan 5, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > What substrates do people recommend for printing high quality,
> > waterproof transparencies or even digital negatives?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting, just curious as to why you need something thinner?
--
Best Wishes,

Mark Nelson
Precision Digital Negatives
PDNPrint Forum @ Yahoo Groups

Mark Nelson Photography


On Jan 6, 2010, at 5:39:24 AM, "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...> wrote:

From:   "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
Subject:    Re: [Digital BW] Digital Negatives
Date:   January 6, 2010 5:39:24 AM CST
To: "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com" <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Thanks. I am hoping for something thinner. The Pictorico product, 
besides not being available in the UK, is 145 microns whereas I am 
hoping to get c100 microns.



On 5 Jan 2010, at 23:54, Mark Nelson <Ender100@...> wrote:

> Pictorico Ultra OHP
>
> Mark Nelson
> www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
> PDNPRint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
> www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com
>
> sent from my iPhonetypeDeviceThingy
>
> On Jan 5, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > What substrates do people recommend for printing high quality,
> > waterproof transparencies or even digital negatives?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I need to print a high quality image, cut it out and use it in another  
application.


On 6 Jan 2010, at 18:35, ender100 wrote:

> Interesting, just curious as to why you need something thinner?
> --
> Best Wishes,
>
> Mark Nelson
> Precision Digital Negatives
> PDNPrint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
>
> Mark Nelson Photography
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]